Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?
-
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
-
This post is deleted! -
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@stacksofplates said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
A lot of stuff only supports that. Like the Ubiquiti, which only provides .deb packages.
Right, so why do these companies choose to use the less than great CentOS? It makes it seem that the likes of Ubiquiti and XO guys didn't get the message.
I started with Ubuntu. There are a lot of companies that use it (Google, Netflix, Reddit, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tesla, Uber, Walmart, plus how many other smaller companies). I personally don't see an issue with it.
I'm running it for all of my Ubuquiti stuff and on my Chromebook since I couldn't get audio working with Fedora.
To use as a desktop, Ubuntu isn't bad. As a server, it's not so great.
I never had any issues with it running it as a server. My wife's cousin owns a company that does a lot of large web sites. Before switching to Pantheon, they used Ubuntu for everything.
I know some of the large Drupal companies like Acquia use Ubuntu for their base
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
Like I said, I never had any instability issues with it. It always ran fine for me.
-
It's not a question of if it will work or not. <insert Linux flavor here> will run any service just fine. You can run a web server on Linux Mint without issue. Just like you could run a basic file server on Windows XP, that doesn't mean you should.
But when we are talking about what's best for Enterprise server stability, CentOS without question.
-
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
-
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
-
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Didn't know that. I only use CentOS currently.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Didn't know that. I only use CentOS currently.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
-
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
Yep, exactly.
-
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
Yep, exactly.
Let's see... I see you have AD setup, 187 file shares, three different web servers. Would you like me to {self moderdated} up your configuration files, or should I be smart and not touch them?
-
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
Yep, exactly.
Let's see... I see you have AD setup, 187 file shares, three different web servers. Would you like me to {self moderdated} up your configuration files, or should I be smart and not touch them?
Does Ubuntu suffer this?
-
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
Yep, exactly.
Let's see... I see you have AD setup, 187 file shares, three different web servers. Would you like me to {self moderdated} up your configuration files, or should I be smart and not touch them?
Does Ubuntu suffer this?
I haven't seen it do any crazy configuration overwrites in a long time, but Ubuntu and Debian both sure used to do that.
-
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
I get it often on Ubuntu. Never elsewhere.
-
@Dashrender said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@dafyre said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
@travisdh1 said i
Well sure. It is popular. Is it the most stable platform? No, it was never meant to be.
What defines stability in this case?
Knowing security updates won't break config files for one.
I have not had any issues with this on Linux in a long time.
Debian/Ubuntu/Mint (all the same base) are the only major system that feels the need to replace config files on you. If you're doing updates via 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade -y', it actually stops to ask you about replacing config files. Something that just doesn't happen on RedHat/CentOS.
Yeah ... should I replace it with mine, the distributor's copy, or 4 other options, right?
LOL.
Yep, exactly.
Let's see... I see you have AD setup, 187 file shares, three different web servers. Would you like me to {self moderdated} up your configuration files, or should I be smart and not touch them?
Does Ubuntu suffer this?
Yes. It's the biggest offender.
-
@BRRABill said in Linux File Server. Which One Would You Pick?:
Why are so many things (such as the ML XO instructions) on Ubuntu?
Because of the application vendors choosing Ubuntu as their supported platform. No one chooses it because they like it. Not here, anyway.
