Great! A friday afternoon distro-war. I swear by using proxmox + openvz containers with Ubuntu. Yup, you could probably opt for debian if you want even more stable stuff, but this setup has some real nice advantages:
- The virtualisation helps you do backups, helps you make copies of full machines that is really nice if you want to debug problems (even on a different location), you can even deliver your project to the client as a VM. - It runs on very cheap hardware, just use a Desktop. If you combine it with a more expensive storage solution, you can scale up the CPU power very nicely by adding more desktops, and still have excellent uptime (because your SAN is superstable). (that trick comes from Gizmo) - you can run the same OS on your laptop or notebook or desktop. Its all the same software everywhere. Dev-Test-Prod. (ok, except the virtualisation, but (K)ubuntu is the same). - Ubuntu has super support. If you google for 'ubuntu cant get hardware xyz running' there is almost *always* someone who tried that before. Saves you a lot of time. - The cache. We use the central ugandan cache, and then a cache in our office. Installing a new VM, updating it, and then installing a lamp stack is done in less than 15 minutes. And it gives you a full blown, production ready VM. And if you want even better support, you can buy it from canonical. If you need stability, use Hardy and upgrade to Lucid next year. (in my defence: i joined the linux train very late. i did install slackware (i think) in 1994, had no clue what i was doing and then spent 10 years on the dark side. glad i made it back. by that time, ubuntu was pretty usable already.) -- rgds, Reinier Battenberg Director Mountbatten Ltd. +256 758 801 749 www.mountbatten.net On Friday 11 June 2010 09:28:33 Paul Bagyenda wrote: > I guess it wasn't your question, but... If you are looking to run a server, > I swear by SuSE. Great, easy setup and management, good package selection > (e.g. great to see it pick the 32-bit PAE kernel, so that your > 4GB RAM > actually gets used). Happy relationship(!) for I guess 7 years now. > > On Jun 10, 2010, at 15:12, Tim Schofield wrote: > > I'm not sure how the "Fedora is only available for 1686" rumours got > > started but it is available for i386 from here > > > > http://torrent.fedoraproject.org/ > > > > or from here > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-all > > > > or many other places. > > > > Thanks > > Tim > > > > On 10 June 2010 12:56, joachim Gwoke <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thomas, > >> what hardware do you plan to use for your Fedora/CentOS/RHEL? Are you > >> one of those with really old hardware? Something tells me the images > >> with 'i686' will do fine. > >> > >> > >> regards > >> Joachim > >> > >>> Daniel, > >>> Thanks for the advice, > >>> But the further checking shocked me further, Fedora only > >>> has iso images for > >>> i686 and no iso for i386, the ones that are listed on > >>> http://iso.linuxquestions.org/ are actually i686 when > >>> you do a search on for > >>> more fedora iso images, for example the earlier images, the > >>> links where > >>> erased and no longer exist, making it hard to attain an iso > >>> any more for > >>> i386. > >>> The other thing you mentioned about the RHEL directory > >>> structure and command > >>> differences, actually am comfortable with the redhat > >>> structure and finding a > >>> problem with UBUNTU structure and commands (where it > >>> differs from RH). That > >>> is why I was preffering a move back to a Redhat > >>> architecture (Fedora) if I > >>> can get the same feel. > >>> I would love to direct me on how to get free iso images of > >>> RHEL, I don't > >>> care the License, I can have a work around, besides am not > >>> interested in > >>> updating as ma systems are test systems. > >>> Otherwise thanks for the information. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> LUG mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > >> > >> LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > >> > >> All Archives can be found at > >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >> > >> The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > >> attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any > >> way. --------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > LUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > > LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > > All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any > way. --------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
