On Dec 21, 2011 9:13 PM, "Noel Butler" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 00:49 +0100, Christopher Stolzenberg wrote: > > > 2011/12/22 Jim Knuth <[email protected]>: > > > am 22.12.11 00:15 schrieb Christopher Stolzenberg > > > > > > <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > >>> Indeed; very many of us use Debian stable. Which kernel did you install > > >>> that is 2.0.16-friendly, and was this from Debian stable's updates > > >>> system? > > >>> > > >>> regards, Ron > > >> > > >> > > >> Debian for production servers??? That sounds dangerous. > > > > > > > > > sorry, but that`s absolutely bulls*it. *lol* > > > Where have you read then THIS? > > > > My own experience! > > > > Reasons against Debian: > > > > - No LSB certification (Linux Standard Base) > > - No hardware certification (IBM, Dell, HP ...) > > - Incompatible with some Broadcom NICs > > - Full of bugs > > - Free Kernel (non-free firmware removed... lol) > > - Obsolete kernel (incompatible with new hardware) > > - Obsolete packages > > - Only one year support for oldstable *lol* > > - Long delay for security updates
I'm with Jim. Debian has served me well for years. This is just distro-bias. Sure, you need modicum more sense and hands on experience, but that's not bad thing in a production environment.. It would be interesting to chart the number of threads caused by each distro. I don't know who would have the least, but I suspect gentoo and centos would be out in front, with Ubuntu panting along behind.. Simon > > Reasons for debian: > They have largest number of packages! ... oh Wait! thats because they > break up simple packages into 8-10 sub packages where as other distros > use single or split in two .. yeah, scratch that... you're right, no > pro's that I can think of ;) > > Ahhh just before I hit send I remember one, debian, like windows, is an > ideal distro on a server in a Colo that charges for remote hands (incl > reboots), cause they have the highest fail rate. > > Most stable OS's from colo are freebsd, slackware, RHEL, CentOS (ok same > thing) and SuSE, and surprisingly, we once had a customer with an old > win2K box back in mid 00's, that was very well behaved, and it was busy, > they ran a concert/band/event ticketing site on it, truly amazed me that > box. > > Worse OS's would be netbsd, fedora, debian, ubuntu, mint, windows* .. > but very very nice money earners for remote hands :P >
