Os discussion / debate

ProWebUK

Verified User
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,326
Location
UK
Post modified..... what OS should DA look at supporting next... opinions comments anything relating the issue is welcome to be put forward here.

Note this is not officially to be used by DirectAdmin although depending on the turn out there may i guess be a possibility :D
 

interfasys

Verified User
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,099
Location
Switzerland
I've asked about RHE before ordering a new server and Support told me that they did not work on a version of DA for RHN. So I guess it will take a bit longer than 01/01/04 to get it ;)
 

loopforever

Verified User
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
298
Location
/home/admin
We need Debian or Gentoo before all else...Redhat is useless unless you're dependent on RPMs (which you shouldn't be! :p) and the FreeBSD devs are battling amoungst themselves. The smart choice, if you're looking towards the future, would be to push the demand for a release of DA on a stable (in both developmental and usage respects) OS.
 

ProWebUK

Verified User
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,326
Location
UK
loopforever said:
Redhat is useless unless you're dependent on RPMs (which you shouldn't be! :p)
I think every RPM available for redhat is available to be compiled by source. RPM makes many programs far easier to install and precompiled to any systems, it also speeds up how quickly certain applications can be installed configured and running. Also, RPM can be used on many unix systems, not just redhat so either way you can use it :p

loopforever said:
The smart choice, if you're looking towards the future, would be to push the demand for a release of DA on a stable (in both developmental and usage respects) OS.
I know how the RedHat OS works, i know when you pay for support with redhat you get it, I had support with redhat and never had a problem - i'm willing to pay for something if it works how i want it, and would rather pay for something that is suitable for my needs than to get something I dont know very well and isnt really guaranteed any support.

Since RHEL is what ev1 plan to have as a main offering it is what we are intending to work with for the future. We are in no way looking to learn any new OS nor move to something we don't feel comfortable with. In the future we may look into other opertaing systems such as debian and FreeBSD and explore, for now i think priority is on on OS thats supported and that we know.

Look around and check what moves the big providers are doing.... many are taking RHEL simple due to it being the 'premium' OS.

ev1servers and rackspace (both huge companies as you probably know) taking on RHEL as their primary OS. I would guess the reason to this is simply, neither would have to retrain staff in any dramatic ways. ev1 are releasing FBSD 2 weeks later (15/01/04 I think) since they have to train for the new OS quite simple, and that is for unmanaged... if rackspace had to do it, the training I expect would be a lot more in depth due to the servers being managed - they need to know every small piece of information in the case that any of them servers occured a problem without that they would more than likely come across a fair few problems.

Reading back through this i wrote a little to much, maybe :D

Chris
 

interfasys

Verified User
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,099
Location
Switzerland
Since you're an admin, maybe you can move those OS posts in the general discussion forum?

Also, RHE is already available at Servermatrix at no extra cost and those servers are managed, meaning that they run up2date daily and that you have access to all the ES version RH servers.
 

ProWebUK

Verified User
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,326
Location
UK
interfasys said:
Since you're an admin, maybe you can move those OS posts in the general discussion forum?
Done :)

interfasys said:
Also, RHE is already available at Servermatrix at no extra cost and those servers are managed
What i meant was, if rackspace were to move from something like redhat 7.3, to freebsd or debian then they would have a lot more difficulty than moving to RHEL, redhat upgrading to redhat is similar, redhat to bsd is not - or so it seems.

Chris
 

loopforever

Verified User
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
298
Location
/home/admin
Common sense and love for open source software should tell you that what RedHat is doing is ridiculous - they're taking a product that they have built up to be very popular over the years, and forcing users to pay for newer versions. Sure, it's tried and true, but so are a bunch of other OSs, they're just not as widely used. I know for a fact that RedHat cannot offer any level of official support in the time frame Gentoo devs or users can. If you log on to Gentoo's IRC room, you'll see hundreds of ACTIVE users ready to help you out. They're damn good. With support like that, offered at NO cost, and a proven superior operating system (AND portage system based on BSDs) there is NO way in hell I'd ever pay for RedHat.

Secondly, of course, freeBSD is great, but the development is not. My friend is friends with some of the developers and they've reported that feuding is tearing the project apart. Do I want to invest my time in running and maintaining a server that has an operating system that is borderline obsolete? Absolutely not.

This is why I suggest that Debian (which Mark has confirmed they are going to release DA for) and Gentoo versions of DA be released before freeBSD 5.1. Especially since RHEL is right around the corner and RH and RPM lovin hippies are dead serious about upgrading.
 

interfasys

Verified User
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,099
Location
Switzerland
I just got myself a lifetime license of Lindows, maybe I should try to see if they have DA in their Click n' Run =)
 

loopforever

Verified User
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
298
Location
/home/admin
interfasys said:
I just got myself a lifetime license of Lindows, maybe I should try to see if they have DA in their Click n' Run =)
I'm going to pretend like I didn't hear you say this... :p

Btw, Lindows is no more, or at least its name is...
 

ProWebUK

Verified User
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
2,326
Location
UK
As much as a few would prefer debian, i'm sure there will still at the moment be many more using redhat and RHEL not really wanting to move elsewhere for the reasons I stated above.

im sure a provider for many users here would be ev1, and they alone are *currently* only planning to offer RHEL and FBSD support. That immediatly knocks directadmin out of the door for users wanting to stick with the redhat based OS.

Look at the other panels, what they support;

Ensim: Windows / fedora / RHEL
Plesk: Fedora / FBSD (4.7 / 4.8) / Mandrake / RHEL /(howto on forums)
CPanel: Redhat / mandrake / FBSD / os x / Suse / fedora / debian / beta / trustix / windows /RHEL

When you compare like that you can see RHEL is possible on all 3 (on 1 of them its not official, but you have a guide on upgrading!)

comment i noticed on another forum:

Most likely Fedora will be an alternative in several months, but not now. RHEL is also an alternative if you lease the server from a company that has a contract with Redhat; the fees are much lower.
Personally I wouldn't hesitate to switch to FreeBSD to cut costs, but my personal advise is to use what you can afford. If you can afford RHEL, use it because in a way or another the entire Linux comunity will benefit. Let's not forget that RedHat has money behind Fedora and several other projects.

Chris
 

bvvelzen

Verified User
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
82
Location
Netherlands
I think this is a difficult feature for DA because now when anybody is asking support I think 99% has RH so that's quit easy. Now DA faces a choice to go for only 1 or 2 OS's or for a lot like CPannel. But the problem with a lot of OS's is what I think that the support needs to be much bigger because of so much OS's.

But I think that DA will find a perfect solution for us to simply migrate to a stable system.

Greetings,
 

nobaloney

NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
26,119
Location
California
there's already an RHEL clone created from the original RHEL source RPMs (legal, as per the license).

But you'll also need security updates for it, and it remains to be seen if any volunteer group can manage that.

Fedora-Legacy has been around for many months, and now, two days beforte they're supposed to start offering updates, they're still arguing about the first press release.

I'm sticking (for the time being) with RHL7.3, and buying commercial updates from Progeny.

I'm testing FreeBSD, and from where I sit I haven't heard anything concrete about problems with the project; I'd like to see something a bit more specific than a friend of a friend said. All that is, is spreading FUD.

Jeff
 

nobaloney

NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
26,119
Location
California
me said:
there's already an RHEL clone created from the original RHEL source RPMs (legal, as per the license).
I found it; it's called WhiteBoxLinux and information is available at:
http://whiteboxlinux.org/

But the bad news is security updates; you'll have to get the latest ones from Red Hat. You'll only be able to get the SRPMs which as of today, RH is making available to everyone, whether or not they've bought RHEL.

However there's nothing in the Linux license that requires they give the SRPMs to everyone, so they could stop at any time.

And you'll have to compile them yourself.

Jeff
 

existenz

Verified User
Joined
Jul 18, 2003
Messages
607
Location
/dev/null
loopforever said:
Secondly, of course, freeBSD is great, but the development is not. My friend is friends with some of the developers and they've reported that feuding is tearing the project apart. Do I want to invest my time in running and maintaining a server that has an operating system that is borderline obsolete? Absolutely not.
I am not sure what you were getting at...and I am sure you have crediable information but I don't see the FreeBSD project getting torn apart? Currently you have reps from Apple, Yahoo, The Weather Channel whom all have a major stake in FreeBSD. I have heard about problems among teams but who here has a job where everyone gets along. I am sure people working in the Fedora project will face the same problems.

Could you clarify the obsolete part of the deal? Are you reffering to lack of development? I like bvvelzen idea, take one or two very stable Linux distro's and possibly FreeBSD and OS X on the Unix side and call it a day. That covers just about anyone...as long as we don't see a windows version everything will be ok
:D
 

nobaloney

NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
26,119
Location
California
existenz said:
as long as we don't see a windows version everything will be ok
I think we agree about FreeBSD and it's development.

While Our shop is almost completely MS free (no MS hosting, only two MS desktops, one an ancient 98 scheduled to be retired, and one a W2K desktop here to run some systems that won't run on anything else) I think it would be wrong to completely discount MS hosting; it's a market to fill.

Now that said, I don't expect to see DA for Windows. Sure you could run Apache, Bind, Perl, PHP, etc., on Windows and that would make it much easier (though still not really easy) to port DA to Windows. But then you'd have no reason to make the port; any port to Windows would have to use IIS and offer Microsoft native FPX , DAV, ASP, etc., as well as offering a choice of the expensive Microsoft Exchange or less expensive (perhaps Mailtraq) alternatives for email hosting.

It's not an easy port, and not a one-man or two-man job.

Jeff (who used to be the Western Hemisphere Distributor for Mailtraq)
 

interfasys

Verified User
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,099
Location
Switzerland
Yep, a WinDA should not be considered before the release of DA 2 which will bring much needed features unless Windevs are hired to do the job.
 

existenz

Verified User
Joined
Jul 18, 2003
Messages
607
Location
/dev/null
That would not be that hard as long as the software matched and all the files were located. They have talked about supporting other *nix OS's one at a time.
 
Top