Looking for a good server distro


Recommended Posts

I'm getting ready to update my server (uses: vbulletin, mysql, php, perl). I have Redhat on it now but since they got into Fedora, I don't think I want to use that in my server.... any suggestions? I'm looking for something easy to maintain but strong in security. Thanks.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/269495-looking-for-a-good-server-distro/
Share on other sites

I'm no Linux guru but Mandrake and Suse have always been great to me. They've got nice administration tools built in and they run rock solid.

That's just me though. I use them as a compliment to many networks. I like Mandrake for schools because it looks nice and friendly for others to use. I use Squid Proxy most times on Mandrake. Nice app!

I still want to try out Gentoo but haven't had time yet.

Either of the following would be good to use imo.

1) FreeBSD

2) Debian

3) SuSE

I never really messed around with BSD but from user-feedback and articles that I've been reading, it's obvious that BSD is the most secure thing to run on a server.

Debian is great cause of Apt. It has packages in the stable and testing mirrors that are 99.9% sure to work and you'll have strictly what you need. You install the base system and install anything afterwards with apt-get.

SuSE, well, it has a pretty installation that people enjoy looking at and it works. It's easy to setup and YaST isn't bad at all. Just make sure that the rpm's that you will be using will install on SuSE (sometimes they can be distro-specific if not mistaken).

But as far as linux distributions go, you could pretty much use almost anything as long as the package managment tool that it provides is reliable (don't need one but it sure makes life easy for admins). Apt and Portage are the two systems that I'd say are reliable as far as linux goes.

Well I used to be a UNIX guy, then a couple of years ago I was a BSD guy and now I'm a Linux guy. I've ran all kinds of servers. FreeBSD is a really fine OS for a server. There are things that are different in BSD than Linux, but its easy to distinguish. Oh yeah and I used to pretty much have to compile everything on my BSD server, but that was a couple of years ago.

Thanks all for the advise. I'm not really not a fan of compiling my own packages but I may be willing to do that if there is no other choice. It would really be nice for some of these packages to make it easier to install and upgrade. I think it would really bring Linux more into the mainstream (desktop). It would also be nice to get a distro that would keep up to date with tech instead of having to upgrade all the time to the newest version of things (or at least semi new).

It would really be nice for some of these packages to make it easier to install and upgrade. I think it would really bring Linux more into the mainstream (desktop). It would also be nice to get a distro that would keep up to date with tech instead of having to upgrade all the time to the newest version of things (or at least semi new).

585273046[/snapback]

:blink:

Odd, but I think Linux does an excellent job of what you describe. Especially when you compare it to the 'other' significant OS that is in the market. ;)

Thanks all for the advise. I'm not really not a fan of compiling my own packages but I may be willing to do that if there is no other choice. It would really be nice for some of these packages to make it easier to install and upgrade. I think it would really bring Linux more into the mainstream (desktop). It would also be nice to get a distro that would keep up to date with tech instead of having to upgrade all the time to the newest version of things (or at least semi new).

585273046[/snapback]

Most distros come with package managers that already make it easier to install. One of the most popular is APT-get for Debian.

You type apt-get install <program> and it searches the APT repositories online, finds it, downloads and then installs it for you. That's it. Type apt-get upgrade and it will search through your apps and update them (I believe it uses the RPM database on all distros that use apt-get/apt-get port. Type apt-get dist-upgrade and it will upgrade everything else including your distribution's core files.

Some other distros have Apt-get as well with their own APT repositories for that distribution, such as Fedora Core 2 and 3.

Windows isn't even that easy.

You have YUM as well, or even just normal RPM installation and a bunch of other package managers.

Any linux distro will most likely fit your needs for a server. It doesn't make much difference. Its all about freedom and choice.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned: White Box. Its just RedHat Enterprise Linux recompiled without RedHat's trademarks.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned: White Box. Its just RedHat Enterprise Linux recompiled without RedHat's trademarks.

585273277[/snapback]

But, doesn't that make it not Open Source? :rofl:

(sorry, inside joke...) ;)

Back on-topic: That is probably the best solution for handling enterprise types of apps. I think almost any flavor of Linux will work well, or the BSD option may be a worthy platform to build from, too! :yes:

But, doesn't that make it not Open Source? :rofl:

(sorry, inside joke...)  ;)

Back on-topic:  That is probably the best solution for handling enterprise types of apps.  I think almost any flavor of Linux will work well, or the BSD option may be a worthy platform to build from, too! :yes:

585273398[/snapback]

hahahaha. Yeah it doesn't matter that the source is open, because it isn't open source!

-

BSD is always a good option, especially being arguably the most secure OS on the planet.

Thanks.. I have never been able to install any BSD or Debian on my test server both had hardware incompatibilities, I believe. Although, I'm sure they would have no issues on the server but I'm not installing any server solution that I can't have on my test server. I never had any issues installing any RedHat product. I'll have to check out Whitebox, Thanks.

Most distros come with package managers that already make it easier to install. One of the most popular is APT-get for Debian.

You type apt-get install <program> and it searches the APT repositories online, finds it, downloads and then installs it for you. That's it. Type apt-get upgrade and it will search through your apps and update them (I believe it uses the RPM database on all distros that use apt-get/apt-get port. Type apt-get dist-upgrade and it will upgrade everything else including your distribution's core files.

Some other distros have Apt-get as well with their own APT repositories for that distribution, such as Fedora Core 2 and 3.

Windows isn't even that easy.

You have YUM as well, or even just normal RPM installation and a bunch of other package managers.

Any linux distro will most likely fit your needs for a server. It doesn't make much difference. Its all about freedom and choice.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned: White Box. Its just RedHat Enterprise Linux recompiled without RedHat's trademarks.

585273277[/snapback]

I'm partial to FreeBSD :-)

The main reason I like it is because it's easy to administer, and it's stable. Ports allows you to compile from source (more versatile than using binaries) while still making updating your software an easy process. The stability means that I rarely have to do anything at all once the server is up and running. Just a few updates here and there and watch the uptime. I guess I'm lazy :p

Arch linux, I'm not convinced. I use it on my desktop and it's not as stable as FreeBSD. Things tend to break too often when updating the OS. It's nice to have a workstation with the latest and greatest, but one wouldn't do the same for a server. And arch tends to be a distro that lives on the bleeding edge. Using arch is kind of like using FreeBSD-CURRENT (you'd want to use FreeBSD-STABLE for your server). I'm not saying that you can't make an arch box stable. It's just that it seems to take more work to achieve that.

Thanks.. I have never been able to install any BSD or Debian on my test server both had hardware incompatibilities, I believe. Although, I'm sure they would have no issues on the server but I'm not installing any server solution that I can't have on my test server. I never had any issues installing any RedHat product. I'll have to check out Whitebox, Thanks.

585273559[/snapback]

Debian "stable" tends to use two year old kernels for those that want something that has been tested under every possible condition. It is very conservative. A bit too conservative for my tastes.

Debian "testing" (i.e. Sarge) uses still a somewhat older kernel but it has far better hardware support than "stable". Personally, I'd consider Debian "testing" to use as a server for most operations.

Debian also has an "unstable" branch that is good for desktop use. I even find that to be rather stable but it's probably too cutting edge for something important.

If you use a debian based distro, I would go with Ubuntu. My company currently uses Ubuntu on most of our servers. The packages in the Ubuntu repository seem better and it is a little bit easier I think. The plus side of Ubuntu is that it has great auto detection of hardware and best of all, it's debian based.

If you use a debian based distro, I would go with Ubuntu.? My company currently uses Ubuntu on most of our servers.? The packages in the Ubuntu repository seem better and it is a little bit easier I think.? The plus side of Ubuntu is that it has great auto detection of hardware and best of all, it's debian based.

585283461[/snapback]

It's also from the unstable branch. Much like Knoppix, Mepis and the other Debian children.

Ubuntu is Debian. You can use whatever repositories you want. They are usually just mirrors of one another anyway. You can configure Debian to look like Ubuntu and you can configure Ubuntu to look like Debian. It's just a matter of apt-get installing a few packages or apt-get removing a few packages.

Edit:

I know this is an old post (it came up on a Google search) but now that Ubuntu uses Hoary you can't necessarily use non-Ubuntu repositories. Earlier versions of Ubuntu (that used xfree86 rather than x.org) weren't as picky.

Edited by fred666
I'm no Linux guru but Mandrake and Suse have always been great to me.  They've got nice administration tools built in and they run rock solid.

That's just me though.  I use them as a compliment to many networks.  I like Mandrake for schools because it looks nice and friendly for others to use.  I use Squid Proxy most times on Mandrake.  Nice app!

I still want to try out Gentoo but haven't had time yet.

585268351[/snapback]

Mandrake is one of the worst OS's for Server use. Its insecure and horrible.

Just my opinion.

However i have to say Redhat enterprise is good for production use, as it has a large support medium.

However, there are other distros such as freebsd and debian which are great for production use.

For a server? I'd go with debian or slackware, or even ditch linux and go with FreeBSD.

585268720[/snapback]

Good choices. I'm using Slackware at the moment. I started not to long ago using the distro, and its pretty easy to configure and to use.

Mandrake is one of the worst OS's for Server use. Its insecure and horrible.

Just my opinion.

However i have to say Redhat enterprise is good for production use, as it has a large support medium.

However, there are other distros such as freebsd and debian which are great for production use.

585300488[/snapback]

Mandrake is geared towards the desktop user and its not really insecure, no more than most distros. I wouldn't personally use Mandrake for a server. Many people use Fedora as a server distro all though its geared towards the desktop just like Mandrake.

Which sense this is a sticky I'll mention Fedora is a more bleeding edge distro than most. And it tries to be. That's good for the desktop market, not for the server market, because the apps aren't as thoroughly tested. I haven't ran into many instability issues though, but I've seen people who have from FC1 - 3.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • But the reality is it will work for people's needs, and they don't care about the technology that makes it. Clearly not everyone's needs, but that low end space where personal laptops were only used to type emails, watch content and browse websites, but they didn't want to do that on a small screen device. Heck, writing that out I can now see the connection and reason it'll do so well. Apple is about experience. If the experience is bad, they don't release it. Low end Windows laptop manufacturers up until this point have not taken that into consideration ever before, so slow laggy usage with brittle slimey plastic shells were common. I hope that the low end space at least creates better physical products that last a bit longer, and if Microsoft get their act together, they could also have a solid OS on such low end hardware that would actually make the experience work for what the hardware was intended for.
    • Hello, Bonjour is Apple's implementation of a multicast-DNS service, which allows devices running Apple's software and/or hardware to find each other on your local network.  I believe the Windows version was last updated around 2010. If you do not need it, you can stop and disable the Bonjour service in the Services Control Manager (filename: SERVICES.MSC).  Once you have done that, the operating system will no longer attempt to load the service. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky  
    • This AMD RX 9070 16GB GPU that performs close to Nvidia 5070 is under $600 by Sayan Sen With the memory shortage that's prevalent nowadays, discounts are super-hard to get. As such we post good deals whenever they pop up. Recently, we covered a few great discounts on SSDs wherein you can get a 4TB TeamGroup NVMe PCIe Gen4 drive for just $400 thanks to a special coupon. If you want a faster product but don't need all that capacity, you can also opt for Samsung's 990 PRO 2TB that is on sale for its lowest price in over three months. Let's say though that you are on the hunt for a 1440p gaming card. In that case AMD's RX 9070 non-XT can help, and with its 16GB VRAM, you can also run AI models locally without worrying about bottlenecking (check out our recent 9070 GRE reviews for gaming and productivity to get an idea). The PowerColor Reaper variant of the RX 9070 is currently on sale for just $580 which is a very good price in the current state of affairs (purchase link under the specs table down below). The Reaper cooler on this 9070 uses a triple‑fan design with ring‑blade fans, paired with premium dual ball bearings to extend lifespan and reduce friction. "Intelligent" fan control allows the fans to remain idle at lower temperatures, only spinning up when the GPU is under load. A nickel‑plated copper base makes direct contact with both the GPU and memory modules, helping to spread heat evenly. PowerColor also applies Honeywell PTM7950 phase‑change thermal interface material (TIM), which fills microscopic gaps between the die and heatsink for more efficient thermal transfer. The fan shroud is shorter in height as the firm has made it such that it can be used in certain SFF (small form factor) cases. The technical specifications of the Reaper RX 9070 are given in the table below: Specification Value Stream Processors 3584 Units Video Memory 16GB GDDR6 Memory Speed 20.0 Gbps Memory Interface 256-bit Engine Clock Game Clock: up to 2070 MHz Boost Clock: up to 2520 MHz Bus Standard PCI Express 5.0 x16 Display Connectors 1 x HDMI 2.1b, 3 x DisplayPort 2.1a Maximum Resolution DisplayPort: 7680 × 4320 HDMI: 7680 × 4320 Board Dimensions 289mm × 111mm × 41mm 304mm × 127mm × 42mm (with bracket) Slot 2 Minimum System Power Requirement 600W Power Connectors Two 8-pin PCI Express Get the PowerColor Reaper RX 9070 at the links below (you get only a 90-day warranty on Woot): PowerColor Reaper Radeon RX 9070 16GB Graphics Card (RX9070 16G-A): $579.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US) (Was: $700) PowerColor Reaper Radeon RX 9070 16GB Graphics Card (RX9070 16G-A): $559.99 (Sold and Shipped by Woot US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Are they marketed as an entry into astronomy or astrophotography? I do astrophotography. With big rigs, lots of computers, cables and headaches. I love it. And by learning this ridiculously complex hobby, I’ve learned about the objects I’m shooting. Astronomy followed from photography.
    • Microsoft confirms Recycle Bin bug across all versions of Windows by Usama Jawad A couple of days ago, we reported that the latest Patch Tuesday update has seemingly resulted in a lot of issues for many users, including OneDrive and Dropbox access problems, BitLocker recovery lockouts, and BSODs. Although Microsoft is yet to acknowledge these bugs, it has confirmed another, relatively smaller issue across all supported versions of Windows. In an update on its Windows Release Health Dashboard, Microsoft has confirmed that after installing June's Patch Tuesday update (KB5094126), you'll experience unexpected behavior when leveraging Recycle Bin. Basically, when you attempt to delete an item from the Recycle Bin, the confirm dialog will show you the internal file name of that content rather than the actual name. For example, the file may be named abc.png, but the confirm dialog will ask if you're sure that you want to permanently delete $Rxxxxx.png from the Recycle Bin. This is pretty much it for the scope of the bug itself; it just displays the wrong name in the confirm dialog. The correct name will be shown in the list view of the Recycle Bin and if you restore the file, it will return with the correct name as well. This issue affects pretty much all supported versions of Windows client and server, including: Client: Windows 11, version 26H1; Windows 11, version 25H2; Windows 11, version 24H2; Windows 11, version 23H2; Windows 10, version 22H2; Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC 2021; Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC 2019; Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB 2016 Server: Windows Server 2025; Windows Server 2022; Windows Server 2019; Windows Server 2016; Windows Server 2012 R2; Windows Server 2012 As things currently stand, Microsoft is working on a concrete solution that will be released in a "future" Windows update. It remains to be seen if the firm will wait till the next Patch Tuesday or roll out an out-of-band (OOB) fix. The good news is that commercial customers can deploy a workaround right now, but they will have to reach out to Microsoft Support for Business for additional details.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Jordan Smith earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      578
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      184
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      72
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!