[Linux4christians] Re: Linux Server

[Michael Hipp]

> From: "David Fierbaugh" <david at fierbaugh.org>
> On Thursday 15 June 2006 11:45, Michael Hipp wrote:
> > Just some thoughts...
> >
> > It's probably not entirely accurate at this date to class Ubuntu only as a
> > desktop distro. As they have a separate install CD for server, specific
> > kernels for server use, and some special application packages like LAMP.
> > With the long term support in place Ubuntu is arguably getting positioned
> > to be considered an "enterprise" distro for both desktop and server. I sure
> > like the direction it is headed, but time will tell if they have the
> > wherewithal to pull it off.
> >
> 
> I've not tried Ubuntu on a server, nor seen it set up as such. What advantage
> is gained from using Ubuntu over Debian on a server? I would expect Debian to
> be more stable/secure.

I've not used Debian enough lately to speak with much authority on it. But I picked Ubuntu for "my" distro mainly for these reasons (as regards why I didn't just use Debian instead):

a) Needed a distro equally adept at both server and desktop
b) Default server install gives you a minimalistic server with minimum effort
c) Default desktop install gives you a full-featured desktop with minimum effort
d) Up-to-date package versions

I really, really wanted to use Debian but (a) & (c) precluded it (at least at that time - 1.5 years ago). At that time, the instructions for getting X and a DE up and running and configured comprised several pages of HOWTO instructions. That same task on a more desktop-focused distro requires essentially no instructions. But again, my info is dated and might be utterly wrong now.

I don't have real data to compare the security/stability of Debian vs Ubuntu. Debian is legendary and for good reason. Ubuntu has been very stable for me and security updates are issued prompty. The more "mature" packages in Debian stable is probably an advantage here.

Michael