On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:19:43PM -0400, Jason Tower wrote: > would ubuntu be considered stable enough for server use? meaning, > highly unlikely to kernel panic for no apparent reason, common server > apps (apache, postfix, mailman, mysql, postgres, rsyncd, samba, etc) are > well tested versions and not bleeding edge, that kind of thing.
I have a Warty (4.10) machine that has been chugging along quite nicely.
As a Debian/Ubuntu kinda guy, I like the stable (but not too old) idea
coupled with a lengthy support schedule (at least 18 months for each
Ubuntu release).
Frankly, since Sarge was released, the real issue is whether to consider
Debian Sarge over Ubuntu Hoary. Sarge is the king of the stable world in
my opinion - its supported package base is huge compared with Hoary's
supported ("main").
The minimal ("server" option) install of Hoary is fairly slim, though
Sarge's is a bit smaller. Both stable releases have a good default
kernel; Hoary's is newer. Both have the standard array of "server"
applications, though Sarge's supported base is again larger.
Essentially, you can't go wrong with either.
-Daniel
P.S. As a universe maintainer for Ubuntu, I must mention that security
updates for the universe and multiverse repos are best-effort (as
opposed to the main repository).
--
Daniel T. Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG key: www.sh.nu/~crimsun/pubkey.gpg.asc
pgpDJ1a3aKaD2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/ TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
