DirectAdmin for Enterprise 6.0

Hello

My biggest concern is that im not sure i can manage the change of OS without pain :)

But what is the problem with waiting for centos6 ?

I have not been folowing the centos news, but seams like they are falling appart a litle and having some issues. If so, i suppose its better to start now preparing for the next OS.

But why not change for something more like debian or ubuntu ?

Sky
 
You should be able to switch from CentOS5 to SL6 as easily as you can switch from CentOS5 to CentOS6. Which of course is by rebuilding from scratch.

I've already posted reasons to not switch, but here's a reason to not wait:

The longer the delays, the shorter the eventual update will be current, and the shorter the period between server rebuilds.

You decide.

Jeff
 
DirectAdmin Support said:
A client sent me this today:
http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/calendar/view/2011-5

Which (if it's true) would imply that they're just about done CentOS 6 and nearing release.

The question is now, do we wait the few weeks and use it (we know it, less likely to run into surprises), or move to SL6 if it is (or is not) a better all-around choice.

I would personally prefer to wait for CentOS, since it's what we've always used , but am open to open to opinions/comments.

John
Click to expand...
Wait for CentOS6!
 
The CentOS calendar (centos.org) shows release as imminent. My hope is that it doesn't slip and that if it does, my suggestion would be for DirectAdmin staff to move forward with Scientific Linux. I've just finished building a CentOS 5 server for DirectAdmin, and I Won't build any more; CentOS 5 is just getting to close to EOL.

I've read up on DirectAdmin and I believe SL to be a good build OS for RHEL/CentOS/SL brands of Linux, with no real changes except possibly the reading/parsing of the redhat-release file, and I'd like to move forward with it, even into the future, unless the CentOS staff can get their act together; we're all in the business of doing business; we shouldn't have to worry about our OS of choice.

Here's an interesting thread on Scientific Linux vs other Linux distributions.:

Jeff
 
Actually, they changed it just about yesterday. Before that, "Sign off Day" is Jun 11 and "Begin to Sync to External Mirror" is on Jun 13. (Not sure about "Sync to External Mirror" but it's some time in that week.) Now, they pushed "Sync to External Mirror" to Jun 20.

Just hope that they don't changed it again.
 
I'm still in favor of switching now to Scientific Linux; I don't anticipate problems with it. Until we can get to Enterprise Linux 6, i don't think I'm going to be building any more servers, except perhaps VPS instances.

CentOS 5 is just too close to end of life for us to invest much more into it after the server we're installing the end of this week.

Jeff
 
jlasman said:
I'm still in favor of switching now to Scientific Linux; I don't anticipate problems with it. Until we can get to Enterprise Linux 6, i don't think I'm going to be building any more servers, except perhaps VPS instances.

CentOS 5 is just too close to end of life for us to invest much more into it after the server we're installing the end of this week.

Jeff
Click to expand...

CentOS is here to stay, no need to go for some other baloney name OS.
 
Do you know anything about the history of Scientific Linux, who develops it, and why?

Possibly not.

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/history.long

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/future

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/credit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Linux

Scientific Linux is sponsored by both CERN and Fermilab.

Software compiled on any one of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, CentOS and Scientific Linux, should work on any system running one of the others. Of course should is the operative word, but results have been good.

Jeff
 
Looking at who is behind SL, I think it's good to have it supported by DA.
We have installed a server with SL yesterday and the test looks pretty quick and snappy. :p
 
uberguru said:
CentOS is here to stay, no need to go for some other baloney name OS.
Click to expand...

While SL might not sound impressive, it's backing is anything but baloney! :D

Personally I'll be going with Centos 6.x for my new servers only because I don't just use CentOS for web servers. As there is possibility that some of my clients may want to switch to paid RHEL licenses, the as close to 100% as possible binary identical objective of CentOS implies a higher chance of a successful migration without breaking things.

While SL doesn't guarantee binary compatibility, it otherwise appears to be just as good as a RHEL fork if that particular objective isn't key.

I've been running a SL 6 server as a test/experience for subsequent CentOS 6 installations. So far it's been pretty OK. Of course it's not heavily loaded, just running 2 Centos 5.6 VMs with DA and a dozen or so sites each.
 
jlasman said:
Do you know anything about the history of Scientific Linux, who develops it, and why?

Possibly not.

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/history.long

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/future

https://www.scientificlinux.org/about/credit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Linux

Scientific Linux is sponsored by both CERN and Fermilab.

Software compiled on any one of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, CentOS and Scientific Linux, should work on any system running one of the others. Of course should is the operative word, but results have been good.

Jeff
Click to expand...

If this world was tending towards a good side, then that is a good news, but that is not the case. As everyone can see the world, is moving to a New World Order, and if you don't know what that means or haven't heard of it, then i suggest you go online and find out or perhaps pay more attention to Politics when you are not working on servers.

Anyways my suggestion is stay away from anything Government run, because anything Government run is going to be Government controlled, doesn't have to happen now but it sure will.
Also why the urgent need to leave CentOS? That is how the world has been moving gradually to New World Order, when people keep fixing things that aren't broken.

CentOS may not be the best thing but i will tell you just pay attention to what is happening around you. The more new things in technology ofcourse offer better results and other things but please don't forget to look at the downside too, as that is what ends it usually.

That's all i got for you guys for now.
Peace.
 
I must say that I find many of you that are complaining about CentOS, being very impatient, and find it surprising that you just like that without looking back, are willing to abandond CentOS and also many of you trying to make a big deal out of it, that we all should "run" from what some of you have called a "sinking ship".

You really surprise me, that you have absolutely none gratitude for all the good that CentOS have given you for so long time.

I can't help thinking, that with the first sign of anything you dislike about SL, you will then cry out again, and "run" from the "sinking ship"!?

I do not find it problematic to wait a few months extra for the releases, and prefer to wait for them, and in retun get a very stable and reliable OS, and I want to continue using and supporting CentOS wich have proven to be a very good OS that I can rely on.

The calendar shows that "CentOS 6.0 Begin Sync to External Mirrors" 20 june, and from what I have read, they are planning to rush the release of CentOS 6.1 to be released just a few weeks later, so CentOS 6.1 will most probably be released very soon.

Also I hope that DirectAdmin continue to fully support CentOS, just like today. One of the advantages of using CentOS with DirectAdmin until now, is that CentOS have been the main development platform for the developers of DirectAdmin, and therfor given us that run CentOS a extra stable combination of OS and CP.
 
Last edited:
ditto said:
I must say that I find many of you that are complaining about CentOS, being very impatient, and find it surprising that you just like that without looking back, are willing to abandond CentOS and also many of you trying to make a big deal out of it, that we all should "run" from what some of you have called a "sinking ship".
Click to expand...

To be honest, I find that much of the sentiments about the state of CentOS stems more from a perceived lack of transparency from the developers as well as concerns over delayed security updates.

Personally I don't really see a pressing need to move to CentOS6 if not for the better virtualization package, on which I'll still mostly be running C5 guest anyway since it's a tried and proven platform that has been running happily for me. I'm not going to migrate over to C6 until 6.1 is out :D
 
uberguru said:
Anyways my suggestion is stay away from anything Government run, because anything Government run is going to be Government controlled, doesn't have to happen now but it sure will.
Click to expand...

Calm down man :D

If we're primarily hosting anti-government sites then I suppose yes, that might be a concern.

However, most, if not all, of us would be using DA on servers to meet clients' needs. Even if SL somehow has an US government backdoor, they aren't going to be doing anything unless your clients' doing something illegal. In which case, it's not really your responsibility as long as you shut them down on official demand I suppose.

So it doesn't really make a difference even if the government is controlling the direction of their development... which in any case would probably have to be affected from the Redhat end of things or else SL wouldn't be considered a RHEL compatible at some point.

Ultimately, we're all screwed at the rate things (population growth, dwindling resources etc) are going so why worry about government controlled OS? :D
 
Hello,

I'm sure both SL and CentOS will work, however since we've already been using CentOS thus far, we do prefer to stick with it. Yes, it's slower in getting released, but we prefer to stay with what has already proven itself. We won't take SL off the table in the long run, but we prefer not to change the proven OS over a matter of some release delays. There could be many unforeseen issues with SL that we didn't expect (such as having to rewrite sections of our installer code, etc.. we prefer not to do that). As it stands, they're quite close to finishing up the ISO releases, so with a little extra patience, we can start rolling.

John
 
DirectAdmin Support said:
Hello,

I'm sure both SL and CentOS will work, however since we've already been using CentOS thus far, we do prefer to stick with it. Yes, it's slower in getting released, but we prefer to stay with what has already proven itself. We won't take SL off the table in the long run, but we prefer not to change the proven OS over a matter of some release delays. There could be many unforeseen issues with SL that we didn't expect (such as having to rewrite sections of our installer code, etc.. we prefer not to do that). As it stands, they're quite close to finishing up the ISO releases, so with a little extra patience, we can start rolling.

John
Click to expand...

Thanks !!!
 
If the CentOS delays don't keep getting extended, then I agree we should stick with CentOS. My issue is that as CentOS 6 continues to get delays, the time left before it's EOL gets shorter and shorter, and we're going to need to rebuild servers often, with at least some downtime for users each time.

My hope is that CentOS 6 will be delivered by the end of this month (but remember that's what they said last month) and that DirectAdmin will come out for it without delay. Then we can do a test build on CentOS6, and try ourselves to see if we can switch to SL repositories and then to SL 6.1. Once we see that, we'll know if the two are enough alike so we'll be able to move forward with SL if need be.

Note the we here refers to me and to my company, and my support for my clients; it has nothing to do with JBMC the company, or DirectAdmin the product.

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top