I agree, both is the obvious choice. But to truly answer the question, I'd focus on Ubuntu (not Debian) and then RHEL. Debian is great, but it is Ubuntu specifically that has the market.
Yes, almost the same is never the same as exactly the same.
@scottalanmiller Yes. This I know. But this isn't bare metal but rather SmartOS hypervisor in a Triton datacenter. So I presume all is atop ZFS. I never delved deeper so honestly do not know.
Hopefully not, as ZFS isn't all that fast. But you need XFS touching WiredTiger... what's lower in the stack isn't what it is concerned with. You still control your own filesystem regardless of what the datacenter may or may not use elsewhere.
Booted straight to the CentOS 4 ISO, went into linux rescue, updated the initrd img and bam. working system from the current (as of 4 days ago) manual disk images I made.
88b47d5c-c3dc-4635-ab9c-1ec25e69ab95-image.png
Next project to re-learn how they restore data files. Have not done that in almost 10 years. Having no virtual infrastructure to play with, prior to this, made that harder.
One thing that would be nice to have, something that I've used on hardware firewalls, is a command that will simulate packets through the firewall rules to see if they will pass or not.
I've not seen something like that for iptables/netfilter.
Not sure about simulating, but you can always send packets at it and use iptables -v to see the counters.
If Red Hat had more resources they could have released a major version each year and then supported it for ten years. Then you'd never have anything older than one year on a new inst
Yes, you would. If you use RHEL 7 and even if RHEL 8 came out th enext day, and RHEL 9 a week later... if you stay on RHEL 7 your code would not change.
I said "New install" Scott. You are saying the exact same thing as I did.
Oh I see what you are saying. No one does that, though, they have STS for that. Fedora, Ubuntu Current, Normal Windows 2019. They all do STS. LTS makes no sense in the real world if you are willing to use what is new at install time.
The question is - why is the quality so bad? Isn't the process supposed to catch bad quality?
Their process is consider the windows insider group (extreme power users) to be a good enough replacement for proper QE teams, and writing automated build tests.
Right, the new process isn't to catch bad things, it's actually to see bad things as "not all that bad." Presumably because a shift from viewing their products as being for business to being for entertainment. Remember when Windows 95 was a key tool for businesses, but by Windows 98 they had made sure to put a "for entertainment purposes only" label on the product to make sure no one confused it with something that was intended for business use?
I feel like that's where they are now. At least internally, no one is really thinking of this as a business tool.
@black3dynamite Aha! They both did it! Yes, I have a thing about an entire desktop worth of space getting forced down into one little bar, and the menu being at least 2 clicks deeper than it was.
Why is the menu deeper? I don't prefer this setup either, but it's no deeper. It's still a button on the desktop for me.
Because as the admin/geek, everything I want/need to use is a submenu of the all programs menu. Granted I mostly just favorite a terminal emulator and be done with it, but it is much farther to move around and menus for me to get through. Give me Cinnamon with a hotkey set for the menu any day.
As long as the search function works, I usually find what I need by searching for it.
