Server :: Which Versions Prefer For CentOS And Debian?
Apr 20, 2011
I am running my web and game server on ubuntu 8.04 lts and am considering in reinstalling a new OS. I would like to try another different OS(most probably CentOS or Debian and I saw alot of good comments about them). I'm not sure what version I am going to install. I searched on websites of companies that rents dedicated servers and noticed that they mainly use Debian 4 or 5 and CentOS 5 or 4.7. I would like you to tell me which versions do you prefer for CentOS and Debian servers.
I built a home server (NAS/WWW/SSH/media server etc) and chose CentOS 5 as the OS (stability, easy of configuration).I was just about to start tuning the power consumption when I realised that the kernel CentOS uses is so "old" that it does not support the latest reduced power consumption enhancements that Linux has achieved in big strides in the recent past (we are probably still talking 6-12+ months ago e.g. tickless kernel)..
So my questions; 1) I know CentOS was maybe not meant for home servers (certainly its not its primary purpose), but if it is, any ideas of what kind of power consumption it takes (I know its relative) and if there are particular power consumptions that are worthwhile?
2) Do you recommend me compiling my own 2.6.21+ kernel from kernel.org or am I just likely to have compatibility issues (I really did not want to do that) or when is CentOS 5.4 supposed to have a newer 2.6.21+ version kernel?
Was it wrong of me in principle to choose CentOS for a home server when I am power conscious? (I don't have a low-power VIA processor either but a P4 so I am really just hoping to make do with software changes).
I am in the process of building a new server on an Asus P5QPL-AM motherboard and an Intel E8600 processor.explain to me the difference between the two versions and what would you recommend.Also, is there any advantage of SATA over IDE hard drives?
Is it possible to list/find/compare the program versions on a Centos system, against Redhat/Centos Errata/Security/Bug lists? Sort of looking for a way to make sure that all the packages on a system are ok, and not a security risk-- Without having to update every package. A pseudo code, in my mind is:
What do you prefer using for your backup medium and/or method? I'm thinking about the issue because I've simply used a spare hard drive but am considering getting a flash drive for an extra backup. Specifically, if anyone breaks into my home and steals my computer, I will lose both hard drives. I would keep the flash drive somewhere else that the burglar hopefully won't go through, saving the most important data. Losing the data would be far, far more upsetting than losing the hardware. Anyway, do you use hard drives for backup, or do you prefer something else? Flash drives? I wouldn't guess that CDs are very popular for backups, because they hold only 700 MB. DVDs, perhaps?
The 3rd vendor SW is requesting to have KSH version older that 20100202. CentOS 5.5 (x86_64) comes with 20100202-1.el5_5.1 and downgrade version listed is 20100202-1.el5
sudo yum downgrade ksh* Loaded plugins: fastestmirror Setting up Downgrade Process Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
Have a McFee Server; SuperMicro 370der, P3 Dual 1 ghz, 256 gig ram, 2 18.2 gig scsi(lvd) drives.Have tried loading 4 versions of ubuntu to my server and get hung on the agp chipset. don't know where to go to get it to work. Tried 6.0 to 9.10.
Is there something special I have to do to get grub to use UUID's? I am putting a couple of extra drives into a 9.10 system (default installation) with a SCSI drive for the OS. That SCSI drive was sda when I built the machine but of course gets bumped when I add these other drives. The fstab file contains UUID's. All attempts to boot with the other drives attached fail.
I'm missing a fundamental that I just cant seem to wrap my head around with setting up repositories with RepoSync. I set up a local repository when my system was running version 5.2. Everything ran like a top up until the release of 5.3 Upon release I ran the standard yum on my 5.2 server which upgraded it to 5.3 and thats where my mental block is catching me up.
When I run a reposync It seems that all I'm able to download is the 5.2 packages. I'm trying to figure out how I can manage both a 5.2 repo along side a 5.3 repo with reposync and figure out what needs to be done to properly make reposync pull down the latest updates for the newer version. My original thinking was that once my repo server was upgraded to 5.3 it would start pulling the 5.3 updates but obviously I'm way off base since that is not happening.
I have tried to install debian 5.0 and 4.0 without any luck. I have both tried virt-manager and virt-install with both debian-501-i386-netinst.iso, and full dvd. I't always gives me the same error:Starting install.Could not find an installable distribution at '/xen/debian-501-i386-netinst.iso'
I currently have a kickstart server working with RHEL 5.5. I wanted to add a RHEL 6 installation. So, I added a RHEL6 directory to my NFS share and put the contents of the dvd in it. I also added a RHEL6 directory to my tftp directory and put the initrd.img and vmlinuz from RHEL6 in it. I put in the ks.cfg:nfs --server 10.0.1.1 --dir /kick (where /kick is the nfs exported directory). In my pxelinux.cfg directory, I created a file corresponding to the ip address and put in:
On my lenny+backports+debianmultimedia desktop I see two annoyances. 1st: There are multiple versions of same packages. But while attempting to remove the older versions I see apt-get is removing some essential packages. Is there any way to kill this duplicacy of packages? Here is a list of packages whose multiple instances are installed:
Is it correct to assume that I can install many versions of Linux on a PC, provided for each Linux I set up a separate ext4 partition, and GRUB will let me select which OS to load? If so then:
1. I do not have to set up a separate SWAP partition for each Linux, do I? Will one SWAP serve all the OS?
2. If I wanted my /home directory to reside on a separate partition so that my data will not be lost if I reinstall Linux, do I have to create a separate /home partition for every Linux? Or they can share one?
what is involved in upgrading from one major version of Debian to another. When your version is no longer supported, can you just get the DVDs for the current version and run the installer and it detects this is a previous version and only upgrades things as necessary?
I noticed today when I was offered by synaptic to update some packages that there seemed to be two versions available from the same repository (stable). How could that happen?
For instance if I check package "xscreensaver" installed version is 5.30-1+b1 and versions available are; 5.34-1 (testing)5.30-1+deb8u1(stable)5.30-1+b1 (stable)
Below is my /etc/apt/sources.list. I'm not sure why, but rows 1 and 6 are identical except for stable beeing replaced by jessie. Row 3 and 7 are almost same too. Because jessie=stable (at the moment), is there any point with having duplicated rows in sources.list?
Code:
Select alldeb http://ftp.se.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free contrib deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ stable-updates main non-free contrib deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main non-free contrib
deb http://ftp.se.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free deb http://ftp.se.debian.org/debian/ jessie contrib non-free main <--- Same as first row? deb http://security.debian.org/ jessie/updates contrib non-free main
I'm not to clear on the difference between LTS versions and other versions, but think I may want to go with LTS. Can someone tell me if my thinking is correct given the following situation: I have some very cool, but very expensive software installed with a group license from my school, a school which I am not going to be attending for too much longer. So I want to go as long as possible without reinstalling Ubuntu, because once the product is licensed it will be licensed until I reinstall Ubuntu (or I uninstall the program). So I think this is going to require me keep the Ubuntu version I install as long as possible.
So in this case, should I go with 10.04LTS or should I just install Natty Narwhal and keep that as long as possible? It looks like 10.04LTS will be "supported" longer, but I'm not exactly clear on all that "supported" entails. Presumable it means security and software updates will be available for 10.04LTS for much longer than 11.x versions? So I'm thinking I should go with 10.04LTS
Is my thinking correct in going with 10.04LTS? Edit: It was pointed out that this would be against my contractual agreements. Which I suppose is probably true.
I'm running XAMPP 1.7.2 on Ubuntu 8.10 (Linux dt19.im.local 2.6.27-14-generic #1 SMP Tue Aug 18 16:25:45 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux) and am using the PHP 5.3.0 Apache module as standard. For one virtual host I'd like to use PHP 5.2.X as it is part of a project which has a lot of legacy code which is not compatible with PHP 5.3.0. The virtual host configuration block and the applicable directory directive are as follows -
Code:
Checking phpinfo() output on the above virtual host (or using the default virtual host directive and accessing it via http://localhost/[SNIP]/[SNIP]/phpinfo.php rather than [url] shows PHP 5.3.0 is running. After applying minor tweaks such as adding ScriptAlias or SetEnv options the problem persists. I've Googled for a good while and have checked the permissions and the like and tried the advice of other users (XAMPP or otherwise) either resulting in PHP 5.3.0 being used or a HTTP 400 bad request/invalid URI error. I've stuck with the configuration above as this is correct according to the PHP manual.
FYI cgi-bin/php-5.2.6 is a soft symbolic link to /opt/lampp/bin/php-5.2.6 (I've added the FollowSymLinks option to the cgi-bin directory directive in httpd.conf). I've tried installing php5-cgi from the Ubuntu repos and setting it up in a similar way, to no avail. I've also tried copying the executables into the cgi-bin directory, pointing the Action line directly to bin/php-5.2.6 and dropping the -c /opt/lampp/etc/php.ini-pre1.7.2 option in the Action line. I've even tried commenting out the LoadModule lines for PHP which results in a HTTP 400 bad request/invalid URI error. This demonstrates the fact that the PHP CGI use is being ignored.
I've checked httpd.conf and the extra/httpd-*.conf files and ensured all required includes are being loaded. I know that it's probably something stupid on my part which is causing this! Given that I've tried PHP CGI builds in the Ubuntu repos I don't think this is an XAMPP-specific issue.
When we use either apt-get or/and aptitude to update the index. Does anybody know where this index is kept ?The thing is when I remove an entry or two from /etc/apt/sources.list and run $ sudo aptitude update and then run apt-show-versions -a it still shows me packages whose paths I have deleted.
Many software available for patch managment like OCSinventry, cfengine,puppet,redhat satellite server for linux. I want to perform patch management for my Linux server (centOS, debian) My question is how to find out which patches available for Linux and which patches i need to apply. Is there any way to find out require patches?
I just wanted to ask about official opinion or policy concerning newer versions of KDE. Is 4.6 still so buggy or unstable to be included in experimental? What steps are going to be made concerning KDE and what when? I don't like GNOME, KDE 3.5 is out of the game now in 6.0 and KDE 4.4 is IMHO all but mature and finished. So I am not sure what to do now, Kubuntu is buggy and don't like it but they have 4.6...
I tried hard so that I can stay away from version control but in almost good job specifications, I find version control as requirement. So I thought I had to start from somewhere. I always tried to read it but haven't got much luck with it. So I have few problems to ask. I am confused and I really want to know how can I use version control in my context and how will my working environment change with it.
I have Linux VPS Server. I use capnel/whm to create sites in php/joomla. So is version control a software or script which I can install on my linux box like ./configure. Or I have to install it on every site like any framework I use Dreamweaver to edit files via FTP. Now if I install version control then do I still use same method to edit files or then method gets chnaged What about the database like MySQL will it stays same or its also version controlled Will version control make my system slow and how much space it uses on my server.
I installed Ubuntu Server 8.10, 9.04, 10.04, until I discovered that the packages of these versions to upgrade and install graphics settings are not available, then install the current version is 11.04 and there I found that repositories responded and set me right. Then the repositories of previous versions are not available? When I install the current version on all packages that I need to back packs and save it for if I need it later.
How do I get the packages and put together a repository itself if others were dashed this is still operating, and maintenance would be needed?
Have a McFee Server; SuperMicro 370der, P3 Dual 1 ghz, 256 gig ram, 2 18.2 gig scsi(lvd) drives. Have tried loading 4 versions of ubuntu to my server and get hung on the agp chipset. don't know where to go to get it to work. Tried 6.0 to 9.10.
As I mentioned on another thread, I have 2 Ubuntus - Jaunty and Meerkat - as separate drives on my secondary IDE channel. I am removing Jaunty. Meerkat blows it away. And is certainly my preferred OS. However I am looking for a replacement for Jaunty that is more flexible in certain key areas than Ubuntu appears to be.I dont want to be restricted to Debian versions of things like Perl, MySQL, PHP and others. I can run LAMPP, but I would prefer to compile and have the versions of my choice as part of a main test system (apart from Meerkat that is).
I have had enough nightmares in Jaunty with things getting broken and spiralling out of control. I want a distro that doesnt rely on the GUI and its attendant utilities, but can run them when called. Meerkat is stable and has resisted me breaking it so far, but I do not want to push my luck. I have too much time invested in it. I intend to use Meerkat as my primary system on the machine, but want an alternative to *PLAY* with.
