Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

160

There are no benefits that I can discern for using CentOS (or RHEL) over Ubuntu if you are equally familiar with using both OSes. We use RHEL and CentOS heavily at work, and it's just painful -- we're building custom packages left and right because the OS doesn't come with them, and paid RedHat support is worse than useless, being chock full of "pillars of ...


39

'Enterprisey' server deployments are huge projects, with lots of inertia, and admins want to keep them running for many years with only bugfixes. Never new features without a well-rehearsed testing procedure. For this, it's really valuable to have a slow-moving foundation. So that other big and slow-moving projects can be validated on the new version ...


17

By default, CentOS is pretty restrictive in its package selection and slow in the updates to new packages because it literally is a repackage of RHEL, and RHEL is slow and steady for reliability sake. That being said, you have the ability to add other repositories which feature a wider selection and newer packages. Check this link for more possibilities: ...


16

Two reasons come to mind: First -- it is available practically everywhere. I have several Linux systems (CentOS 4.x in this case) which do not have zsh installed. Similarly I have to touch ancient systems like Solaris 2.6 and up, HP-UX 10 and up, and similarly creaky versions of AIX. Therefore I pretty much have to use bash on these computers, which I do ...


14

I don't consider BSD to be quite as mature as Linux on the Desktop but for servers it's rock solid. Whether you want to install BSD or not depends entirely on what you use your machine for. While many things are similar to Linux many things are different too. However here is a run down of the different BSDs OpenBSD : One if it's mail goals is to be the ...


12

So the two sane options these days are: WebDAV, nice on the server side, nice for Linux and Mac OS clients, however the inbuilt Windows client has issues. SCP/SFTP, very easy as you're likely to have ssh anyway, GUI clients easily available (FileZilla for example) Although FTP is still around I'd really avoid setting anything new up based on it.


11

One feature you may find your missing is Outlook. Yes you can use Outlook with Gmail, but not to the same level. You can't use Outlook to open other users calendars or mailboxes, accept meeting invites or get the same offline functionality. To get the full functionality of Gmail, you have to be using the web interface, which some user won't like. You ...


11

The "Killer Feature" is a near-identicalness to RedHat, which is the platform most targeted by third party vendors that offer support. RedHat suffers from flaws in that major new features are only introduced for "major" version bumps; minor version bumps are usually bug- and security-fix only. (Firefox is the major, perhaps only, exception to this rule.) ...


11

Microsoft have been kind enough to have a whole page dedicated to your question (Clicky), and only a few clicks away from their landing page too! "Updated" link (to a pdf). "Updated" link (using Internet Archive Wayback machine)


10

In the Linux world, distributions tend to be lacking in that... cohesive feeling. They are often built in a decentralized manner, which tends to lead to this. The BSDs are usually managed by one person, so you get the feeling that each variant is an actual product that had a lot of planning behind it. Things work together very well, and all components are ...


9

Yes, many. Just to name a few : DTrace, which allows you to display detailled and precise statistics about ressource usage using one line scripts SMF, which allows a clean and streamlined management of services. For example, it restarts services that crash and display short explanations about services refusing to stard. the included firewall is very simple ...


8

Bash generally comes with every system, zsh doesn't. I love zsh, but because of this, I use zsh for interactive use, but Bash for all my scripting. I find this keeps everything simpler, as even when I shopt whatever the bash compatible (setopt SH_WORD_SPLIT ?), I still run into subtle differences.


8

I considered making this switch at a private school I volunteer with. We decided to stick with Exchange for the following reasons: 1) End user re-training, they like Outlook alot. 2) Being able to find people in the directory of Outlook, I tried to find a way to re-produce this with Google Apps but I could not find one. Our users don't want to have to ...


8

BSD is generally considered secure by default, by disabling all but the core services. It's also very stable, you can tell this by looking at one of the many uptime monitoring services. Be warned however, that Linux isn't the same as BSD...there is a learning curve, so don't expect to jump straight into it. For example you'll find all the core commands, ...


8

what are the advantages of using CentOS as a server over Ubuntu? I've found CentOS to support virtualisation under Xen better - I tried Ubuntu at first, but it kept crashing. I've had 10 servers running on CentOS for the past couple of years, no problems. I do use Ubuntu as the OS for virtual machines, though.


8

Each distro has different strengths and different philosophies. Ubuntu aims to be easy to use. They are based on Debian but adopt a slightly more pragmatic approach, as opposed to Debian, which is more pure in their quest for Freedom. Ubuntu has LTS releases which are supported for 3 years. I'd say that's a minimum req for anyone intending to use lots of ...


7

I think this is a pretty opinionated question to ask. Fedora came out of the Redhat project, I believe around the time Redhat had "dropped" desktop users in favor of their "enterprise" userbase. It is a "community" project. Ubuntu is based on Debian, and aims to be easy for non-technical users. OpenSuSE is again a "community" distribution out of the ...


7

We develop for CentOS because it's compatible with RHEL, which is among the most commercially supported distros. When ISVs produce Linux versions of anything (apps, binary kernel drivers, etc), chances are good it'll be supported on RHEL first. For that reason alone, we stick with the most common.


7

I really like /usr/ports. This isn't to say that I don't also really like apt-get, but it's a pleasing feeling to know that your installs are being built on and for your particular machine, with any optimizations you felt like throwing into the makefile defaults. How much of the perceived benefit of that is superstition, I haven't done the research to find ...


7

As a Java developer, the big gotcha is there is mainstream JVM for *BSD. Before everyone flames me out of existence, what I mean is, there is no current shipping JDK from Sun or any of the other major vendors (IBM, BEA/Oracle) so you will always be playing second fiddle to linux and window users.


7

Just a few issues: Pro (Free)BSD: ZFS filesystem/volume management Dtrace for tracing/analysis Excellent and easy to find documentation (FreeBSD Handbook, OpenBSD FAQ, Manual pages are really good and do actually have useful examples) Clean and rock solid OS release upgrade process Separation of the core OS from other software ("Ports collection") BSD ...


7

It sounds like your plan is to determine what DC has the latest changes, and then make them on another DC? No no no no no. This will backfire. AD doesn't replicate by what changes are consistent with each other, it replicates by latest serial number. What you need to do is fix replication. Depending on your version of Windows (you didn't tell us; it would ...


6

I'm a Debian man, so the below may be slightly biased towards Debian. They'll both perform the same and when you compare CentOS + EPEL with Debian + Backports, the package repositories are about as diverse as each other. Debian has a slightly shorter release cycle, so you'll get newer packages more often. It's really down to your personal choice. If ...


6

I would recommend taking a look at Icinga. It's a very active spark of nagios with regular updates. On top of that, it's 100% compatible with nagios-plugins. The advantage of Icinga is that the make one API available to talk with, instead of a bunch of them. In Nagios you can get info from the Core, Cache, NDOMod, NDO2DB, the MySQL DB, Command line,... ...


6

I don't think rsync is the best approach for this. I would use a bash one-liner like the following: $ cd /home/gallery/thumbs && find . -type f | while read file;do if [ ! -f "../images/$file" ];then echo "$file";fi;done If this one-liner produces the right list of files, you can then modify it to run an rm command instead of an echo command.


6

It depends on the type of network activity you are doing. I would set up a test using the typical tasks your users will do and see how long each performs using a stopwatch. There are of course other ways, such as copying a huge file and timing it, but if users don't copy massive files, it doesn't matter. That said, I suspect the performance will be ...


6

if you don't feel like installing another tool... for host in host1 host2 do ssh $host ' cd /dir && find . | while read line do ls -l "$line" done ' | sort > /tmp/temp.$host.$$ done diff /tmp/temp.*.$$ | less echo "don't forget to clean up the temp files!" And yes, it could be done with find and exec or find and xargs just ...


6

I'll warn you all I'm a Linux leech, meaning that I run small consultancy and provide Linux services and support to a couple of SMEs that cannot afford proper linux support, and I'm also a freeloader in the sense that I use only free-as-both-in-beer-and-in-speech stuff and use no external support services. That said, I've found CentOS/RH, especially after ...


6

For the sake of simplicity when I say "SCSI" I'm talking about "traditional" SCSI and SAS So, on the most basic level SCSI drives will be more reliable simple because they are built better. They are designed and priced to be put into high end machines - primarily servers where they will get a lot of abuse and quite possibly run 24/7/365 for 5-7 years. They ...


5

zsh is not fully bash compatible. There are a variety of differences. Newer zsh is more compatible with bash (=~ supported, exec now has the extra flag options, etc) but full compatibility is not a goal, not even under "emulate". For instance, bash substring is ${foo:offset:len} but in zsh it's $foo[start,end] and that's just one simple example. zsh is a ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible