FOR SERVER USE
¡¡¡¡¡THE FINAL FIGHT!!!!!!
>>55605786
>none of the above
depends 100% on the usecase you deploy...
>>55605837
why not
>>55606125
webserver
Where's Arch?
>>55606254
Who is retard that would install archlinux for server
Windows 98 of course
>>55605786
Ubuntu because that's what I'm used to.
>>55606254
>arch on an actual server
neets everybody
>>55606295
>>55606340
>muh unstable meem
Never broke on me
>>55606340
hahahhahaha you make me laugh
>>55606295
>>55606340
>baited
>>55605786
ubuntu LTS
CentOS? Isn't that the distro that almost shut down because an admin went awol and no one else had the password to the site?
Ubuntu is the most supported and is the "standard" for most Linux servers, along with RHEL/CentOS.
>>55606877
centos is managed by redhat lol
>DEBIAN
>>55607182
da fuck is this?
>use any version of ubuntu other than the latest release
>get none of the claimed support at all
>DoS vulnerability in 12.04 LTS Apache2 still not fixed years later
It's fixed in every supported version of Debian how the fuck are Ubuntu so shit. Stop being trend wagon motherfuckers and actually support your releases.
>>55605786
always had some kind of problem with debian on my home server, ubuntu just werks
Gentoo
>>55607195
an OS that only the most pale neckbeard uses.
>>55606914
>Davis holding the domain plus sole 'Founders' rights in the IRC channels makes the situation particularly difficult for the developers. Davis obviously is also in charge of donation money. In the letter: "You have long promised a statement of CentOS project funds, to this date this has not appeared."
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/CentOS-Admin-Mysteriously-Missing
Personally use ubuntu on my servers. Laptop too
Boring office stuff like spread sheets: Red Hat, CentOS
Gaming and noobs general: Ubuntu
Entry-level coding: Debian, Fedora
Reale serious coding, top-end server stuff and hacking: Arch
My last employer used Ubuntu LTS on servers and most desktops. Worked quite well.
>Debian website says you can simply copy the installation ISO to a USB and boot from there
>it's not working
Am I just too stupid for this or what?
>>55607622
are you doing this?cp debian.iso /dev/sdX
>>55607640
I used the cp command, but not that exact one.
how do you move and rename files remotely on centos
>>55607640dd if=debian.iso of=/dev/disk/by-id/... bs=1M conv=fdatasync
>>55607640
That wont work. You need to mount the device first.
>>55605786
>No *BSD
Nope.
>>55607672
Wrong
>>55607640
You might have forgotten to sync the write. Either use "sync" or this:
>>55607668
>>55607672
>>55607668
>>55607656
https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/amd64/ch04s03.html.en
>>55606914
Centos are not managed by Redhat.
In the past, it only managed by communities with no relation at all with Redhat.
Or rather, it's in hostile situation (trademark issues, etc)
For now, things are improving as Redhat staff do contribute to the project.
Redhat also no longer in hostile position.
But still, it's a communities project.
Centos:
You got SELinux works out of box.
Software version too old and lack of many useful software.
Debian:
You got bunch of software in repo.
Lack of SELinux or AppArmor
Ubuntu:
You got AppArmor (optional, if you use it)
Some specific software you use might be no longer maintained in next version and there's no easy alternative.
>>55607869
>Software version too old and lack of many useful software.
Such as?
>>55605786
Hello, my name is Rakeesh.
Why do you fail to incluse Redhat, the most used server OS in the WORLD? I know centOS is the "libre" RHEL version, but for the best result you must always go for the original!
Good evening to you.
>>55607672
hahaha, enjoy your bricked partition
CentOS:
systemd
SELinux
yum
Winner.
>>55607905
>>55605786
http://developers.redhat.com/blog/2016/03/31/no-cost-rhel-developer-subscription-now-available/
>>55607900
Pretty much any new trend in server software for the last 2 years. eg: redis, mongodb, mariadb, etc.
Some of them provide their own repos, so all hope is not lost though.
>>55605786
>not gentoo
kys
>not using fedora
For me it will always be CentOS.
CentOS's release cycle is cripplingly slow. You end up with extremely outdated packages that are nominally security patched. I'd only use it for very simple servers which you expect will barely be touched for years.
>>55607526
>ding, top-end server stuff and hacking: Arch
die
>>55608667
noob who cant even install arch using the COMMAND LINE detected
>>55608679
installing unestable SO in server , good job hacker
>>55605786
they're all pretty much the same
i prefer debian though
>>55605786
The only valid options are
- RHEL / CentOS (maybe scientific Linux and Oracle's distribution too)
- SUSE / openSUSE
- Debian (but sucks imo)
>>55606254
>>55606346
>wanting many updates and probably unstable software
>>55606335
>>55606700
>>55606897
>>55607499
>>55607558
>Ubuntu
>not obviously superior Debian
>>55608091
>short release cylcles
>probably unstable software
>many updates
>>55607680
This
How is fedora not good for serious server shit?
>>55608719
>Debian (but sucks imo)
Elaborate
centos, or more realistically, RHEL.
People who use ubuntu on servers deserve to be hung drawn and quartered. Absolutely disgusting, learn a real linux you losers.
>>55608762
>real linux
Define "real linux"
>>55608719
now this nigger knows what he's talking about.
>>55608774
>Define "real linux"
I'm for real nigga
>>55608774
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.en.html
>>55608819
Debian has been 100% libre out of the box since version 7.0.
>>55608762
hang yourself first
>>55608852
But they offer a non-free repo, so Stallman and his buddies threw a shit fit like the unrealistic children they are.
>>55605786
I run Debian on mostly everything, so I would naturally side with it, but CentOS has the advantage of possible jobs because of RHEL.
>>55607622
Yes, you are too stupid. Install Ubuntu before you hurt yourself.
CentOS or any RedHat derivative really. Debian is a close second. Ubuntu I wouldn't really recommend but I guess if you know how to fix shit... and want to waste time fixing it... then go for it. At that point use Gentoo so you can at least be a good memer.
>>55609520
Agree fully. But i use ubuntu inside a vm for mumble.
>RedCucks
absolutely disgusting
God fucking dammit. You have to learn about particular use cases.
I don't think everybody here use their servers to host a web page. There are different distros with different purposes for each situation.
That said, I didn't see a source based distro around for a custom, minimal installation.
Seriously, this mentality of "one thing" for everything is exactly the toxic mentality we should avoid, and I blame systemd developers.
>>55606340
arch is intended to be a hobby OS, not a real production OS. that is it's stated goal ffs - hobby. haven't any of these neets read the arch way?
>>55607994
Really? I could have sworn I did a "sudo yum install mariadb" on CentOS a month ago and it worked.
Maybe I'm just a forgetful old man....
>>55609733
>toxic mentality
what did she mean by this
>>55605786
only a retarded sysadmin uses ubuntu.
>>55606295
a person who really knows how to use GNU/Linux.
>>55609879
Probably, given that mariadb exists for a long time already.
But if you want latest feature like wsrep, you'll need to add mariadb repo.
>>55609733
If you need minimal installation, maybe you should consider container.
Bundle your software and dependency in your cloud provider format (or make your own), specify how many instance to run, then deploy it.
>>55609796
>intended to be a hobby OS
> ( I ) haven't ... read the arch way
It is your duty to make it stable.
It's is a hobby for people new to linux, they have fun installing DE's and """Obscure""" WM playing with AUR's bleeding edge, etc.
I know for some /g/ays / /g/aymers is a /g's neckbeards/hipster thing, but arch community is huge, even google+ is full of tilling terminals, it is a pretty normie distro cause is really easy to manage packages and pretty straightforward wiki and forum.
digital ocean, rackspace, ramnode, ghandi, linode, etc. offers arch as VPS, arch as server is a thing.
if you can set and forget and also get security updates every once a while, i think it makes for a good server OS
>>55610341
>digital ocean
pretty sure they stopped that because it was such a pain to deal with the rolling release, not to say you can't still install it on your vps, but it's not so easy as to say it is in their dropdown menu when spinning new servers up
don't use any of the others, but my other smaller vps provider does have the arch iso available, so eh
FreeBSD
>>55607472
thx for putting me on a watchlist
I'm currently running Debian with apache, samba, and openvpn. Works great. All of these listed in the thread work great if you know what you're doing. You can make any Linux distro into any other Linux distro with the right knowledge, effort, and time.
I like Debian because it's a ready to use distro with long supported releases and installs easily with fairly minimal packages. It allows me to skip a lot of installation nonsense (re: time spent for minimal returns), then leaves me to set up everything else on my own. It's a nice middle ground between putting together your own distro, and using Ubuntu.
But, everyone has their own preferences. Try a couple out in a virtual machine, and see how you like administering them. That's what I do when I'm considering different server software. Play around in a closed environment with different options.
tbhfam RHEL-based is your best bet on servers (Fedora or CentOS). after that FreeBSD. and finally probably Ubuntu or Debian.
>>55612556
>tbhfam
Post disregarded.
>>55607905
>pajeet subhumans
>ghandi quote
>>55612681
stay mad
the manlets have won
>>55607333
is everything unpopular for unhygienic people
>>55605786
Centos is not user friendly.
Ubuntu has frequent updates.Also canonical botnet.
Debian is what I am using. Has good community support.
Arch is unstable, a ticking time bomb for a production environment.
Gentoo is the best choice IF is you have the knowledge and time to customize it properly.
>>55606254
Running a rolling-release distro on a server? Wtf? There are enough other server-suitable distros if you want your own setup.
>>55610341
arch is for people who aren't smart enough to install or run gentoo properly
>>55607526
no using kali linux for hacking kys
>>55605786
Windows server
>>55607905
Windows servers is the most used server os in the world
CentOS because that's the only one I've tried and I don't know the differences :^)
>>55614850
Ur so dumb
>>55608723
Its a testing distro for red hat...
>>55608723
what is stability
>>55605786
Arch
Having been a massive CentOS fan for years...
I want to use Docker and I want to use ZFS. CentOS is balls for both of those options.
>>55605786
Core OS
>>55608719
</thread>
Best Linux OS to run:
OpenVPN
LAMP
DNSmasq (or any other dns service)
Transmission
>>55605786
Linux is just Linux. All distros are basically the same thing. The only difference is if you use KDE or GNOME on your server for interacting with it. MacOS Server does the same thing too. It's just a matter of if it works or not, which MacOS Server just does and that's why I use it on my home server.
>>55605786
debian/kFreeBSD
>>55606668
Holy fuck literally my boss
>>55606211
Cent + cPanel unless you enjoy wasting time.
>>55607182
CoreOS is good for ur shitty apps.
>>55618251
Kind of this. But distros come with preconfigured software, depends on your skill and time to configure it yourself/troubleshoot.
>>55610251
Someone FINALLY know his shit.
>>55618461
kimsufi, be a pro and snag a KS-2A
>>55619292
samefag
