2009/11/3 Steven Tucker <tux...@yahoo.com.au>: > Hi all, > > I will soon be replacing a Windows 2003 server in a small business with some > Linux variant. Traditionally I have used Debian or Centos, I have been wary > of using Ubuntu (whether justified or not, I was not confident with it on a > server). > > Im now slowly being won over with others telling me how successful their > ubuntu server installs have been, so now Im considering using ubuntu server > edition. > > My question is ...... the next LTS version is 10.04, but my deployment will > likely be in January. What do people think the best course of action is? > install 9.04 and upgrade, install last LTS (I think 8.10 ??) and upgrade, > install last LTS and dont upgrade or go my traditional route and use Centos > or Debian. > I really hope this does not become a distro flame war, its really not > intended (or wanted), just some idea's and hopefully experience. Unless > people have specific reasons they would not use Ubuntu on a server, I am more > interested in hearing thoughts on the Ubuntu upgrade path rather than using a > different distro (unless of course it is justified, not just distro > preference).
I don't experience with Ubuntu Server LTS so will try to avoid a flame war by commenting on it. I'll try to help you focus on what I believe to be the question which should matter to you the most - which distribution and version will help you spend the least amount of time on active support and you expect things to "just work" for you? This is a relatively personal question - it depends a lot on your personal experience and in which distro you feel most comfortable that "you can tuckle anything in the quickest way". If you want to install Distro X at a remote client site, I think you better gain some time of hands-on experience with it, its community, nomenclature, terminology, time lines and record in supporting the version you are going to install. Remember that unless the customers are Linux system admins themselves (even most "professional programmer" do not count), they wouldn't care less if the filesystem is ext4 or Reiser5, or that the system can boot a minute faster or has glibc 2.10-1. All they care is that the server will "be there" and be up every time they try to use it. For your own sanity, you should care about things like stability and security updates - again in the name of spending the least amount of time keeping it up to date and resistant to security attacks. Hope this helps, --Amos -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
