While redhat is great with being able to do up2date, I for one would prefer a DA version for Gentoo. Since gentoo's emerge compiles things from start instead of using a precompiled package, it will probably run better on that system, since its made by that system. On old boxes this may take a bit, but on newer servers it would be great.
Os discussion / debate
- Thread starter ProWebUK
- Start date
Redhat is an RPM based distro, hence the reason it uses RPMS for all the software packaged with it...
You can't really use "since its made by that system." as a cover up for that.
The RPMS distributed by redhat are compiled for that specific redhat version, it's *extremely* unlike any basic hardware differences will affect the hardware, a kernel rpm is probably the only rpm based package that may work with your statement, to say the least I have never had problems using kernel rpms on redhat 7.2/7.3/8/9 Fedora or RHEL... if you have problems you can always compile your own, even package your own kernel rpms which get built from *your* system.
On a further note, you can compile any of the redhat rpms yourself, build fresh rpms yourself or rebuild source rpms provided by redhat.... do *not* think by using RPM you are locked to redhat RPMs only......... you can have redhat made of software compiled on your own system, whether you remain with RPM or not is another question...
If you compile everything from source without building RPMs, you will come across problems later on though, if you continue to use RPM packages that is..
Chris
You can't really use "since its made by that system." as a cover up for that.
The RPMS distributed by redhat are compiled for that specific redhat version, it's *extremely* unlike any basic hardware differences will affect the hardware, a kernel rpm is probably the only rpm based package that may work with your statement, to say the least I have never had problems using kernel rpms on redhat 7.2/7.3/8/9 Fedora or RHEL... if you have problems you can always compile your own, even package your own kernel rpms which get built from *your* system.
On a further note, you can compile any of the redhat rpms yourself, build fresh rpms yourself or rebuild source rpms provided by redhat.... do *not* think by using RPM you are locked to redhat RPMs only......... you can have redhat made of software compiled on your own system, whether you remain with RPM or not is another question...
If you compile everything from source without building RPMs, you will come across problems later on though, if you continue to use RPM packages that is..
Chris
opuszczony
New member
- Joined
- May 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1
Gentoo Linux is the future.
Gentoo is gaining quite a head of steam and its portage functionality has added the beauty of the BSD ports tree to the Linux environ; I am currently running mulitple production servers both related to commerce and eductaional purposes. Any and all of these systems comply with FIRPA standards of security. If an ebuild can be created for this distribution, I can certainly state that it will greatly enhance the future viability of this panel and thus its future market share.
Gentoo is gaining quite a head of steam and its portage functionality has added the beauty of the BSD ports tree to the Linux environ; I am currently running mulitple production servers both related to commerce and eductaional purposes. Any and all of these systems comply with FIRPA standards of security. If an ebuild can be created for this distribution, I can certainly state that it will greatly enhance the future viability of this panel and thus its future market share.
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Everybody has their own favorite brand of Linux, and it's hard to expect a small company to support every flavor out there.
While I like the whole Gentoo concept, I don't like it for webhosting, because in an ideal world you don't have a complete development environment on a webhosting server.
While I'm not there yet, that's a direction I'd like to go in, rather than the direction of needing the development environment.
Jeff
While I like the whole Gentoo concept, I don't like it for webhosting, because in an ideal world you don't have a complete development environment on a webhosting server.
While I'm not there yet, that's a direction I'd like to go in, rather than the direction of needing the development environment.
Jeff
netstability
Verified User
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 15
I must say I have seen an ever increasing number of people using and recommending gentoo for websevers. I think DA and gentoo are an excellent match that could rise together and through sheer speed, security, and intelligence, completely overtake the current mainstream.
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Just having a compiler on a web-addressable server implies a whole bunch of insecurities.
Jeff
Jeff
jlasman said:
Nonsense ... if nothing else look at gentoo hardened
Secure your box and its safe as houses.
oh ... heres a good reason for supporting Gentoo
#gentoo users == 876
#debian users == 738
#fedora users == 334
#redhat user == 84
go figure
Has anyone actually done DA on gentoo?
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Your opinion.
Are you saying that only 84 users actually use RHL to do webhosting?
Or only 84 people actually use RHL ?
You've got me very confused.
Jeff
Are you saying that only 84 users actually use RHL to do webhosting?
Or only 84 people actually use RHL ?
You've got me very confused.
Jeff
What is to stop the sysop making gcc root:root 700?
As for the figures ... those are the number of people in said channels on freenode ... ie there are ten times as many people in the freenode channel as #redhat ... doesn't mean less users ... just much less support.
As for the figures ... those are the number of people in said channels on freenode ... ie there are ten times as many people in the freenode channel as #redhat ... doesn't mean less users ... just much less support.
Nazzy said:
Why is that a reason?
The only reason i could see anyone choosing gentoo due to them figures is to follow the sheep.
As for it meaning better support, I have to disagree - redhat is now commercial and they offer support with the product(s) they provide - if you had redhat enterprise would you prefer an official redhat support rep to help you or someone in an IRC chatroom that could be using linux for the first time today?
Chris
ProWebUK said:
Perhaps you should take a look at that room some time .... there is a fair chunk of the gentoo developers in that chatroom, plus a lot of people that know what they are talking about, all actively helping.
As for commercial .... part of the reason for using linux is the lower cost to run. Also wasn't it just in the news about a bunch of RH employees quiting and forming their own company because RH doesn't offer enough "support for custom builds" or something like that? If i wanted to be locked in to a fairly ridged and automated intaller process that all but discourages you from doing major tweaking, I may as well run windows on all my systems.
Oh and as someone with experience of working in tech suport, i'd take someone with real experience in dealing with the specific problem, than someone that is trained to be able to answer most questions quickly, and pass on any that they don't understand.
Nazzy said:
Firstly, im glad to see you put "part of the reason" there and not just reason - you pay for the support, the stability, and the redhat specifics that make redhat what it is in comparison to other distros.
Nazzy said:
You can get the source for enterprise without purchasing it (how WBEL and a few others came onto the scene) - and you can certainly modify the source as you wish if you purchase it.
Just because its "commerical" doesnt mean its windows and nothing can be modified, and you dont get any source - because you do!
Nazzy said:
Id much rather the manufacturer of my car repair my car then the local garage down the street with no specific knowledge of my car in particular.
The chances are that a trained redhat support staff member will be much more experienced than someone who just started using linux today, last week, or even last month, year etc.
Chris
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Nothing.Nazzy said:
And it's a good idea. That way only crackers who gain root access to your system can compile on it.
Which is most of the crackers and most of the cracks.
Jeff
IS there a gentoo version of DA coming?
I'm leaving stupid freebsd 5.x and would like to go 64bit gentoo. Mainly because 5.x has added a lot of slowness that wasn't foreseen. IT definatly is slower then 4.x is and half the programs we need at the moment don't support it properly or have bugs.
IS there any hopes that DA will be gentoo friendly? Can someone just try it for us to let us know? Plz?
I'm leaving stupid freebsd 5.x and would like to go 64bit gentoo. Mainly because 5.x has added a lot of slowness that wasn't foreseen. IT definatly is slower then 4.x is and half the programs we need at the moment don't support it properly or have bugs.
IS there any hopes that DA will be gentoo friendly? Can someone just try it for us to let us know? Plz?
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
Though I made a decision to not use FreeBSD to host with DA, I'm not sure it's stupid.
I think the problem lies not with FreeBSD, but rather with:
a) FreeBSD requires a lot more admin intervention than does Linux. In that way it's much more like the the Unix it is than it is like Linux.
b) DA did not create a version to use the ports system so a lot of things DA installs aren't in the place a FreeBSD purist would put them.
As far as Gentoo is concerned, I don't think you'd see any advantages to it over any other version of Linux.
The main advantage of Gentoo is that you compile everything for your server so it runs as fast is it can based on your processor, your libraries, etc.
Since DA compiles many important programs used in hosting there's not much real speed advantage in using Gentoo.
I may be in the minority but personally I'd like to see DA staff spending less time on porting and more time on finishing some projects we'd all like to see.
Jeff
I think the problem lies not with FreeBSD, but rather with:
a) FreeBSD requires a lot more admin intervention than does Linux. In that way it's much more like the the Unix it is than it is like Linux.
b) DA did not create a version to use the ports system so a lot of things DA installs aren't in the place a FreeBSD purist would put them.
As far as Gentoo is concerned, I don't think you'd see any advantages to it over any other version of Linux.
The main advantage of Gentoo is that you compile everything for your server so it runs as fast is it can based on your processor, your libraries, etc.
Since DA compiles many important programs used in hosting there's not much real speed advantage in using Gentoo.
I may be in the minority but personally I'd like to see DA staff spending less time on porting and more time on finishing some projects we'd all like to see.
Jeff
jlasman said:
Here here!
The more Operating System's DirectAdmin adds, the slower releases come as we have already noticed.
In my opinion, DA now supports a fair ammount of Operating Systems, to the point that there is more of a market for more features. Just my opinion though
Jeff, your totally wrong. I've been working with FreeBSD since it was born. You totally missed the point. 5.x is total BS when it comes to FreeBSD.
Furthermore, if DA has a problem with releasing versions on so many OS's, then it needs to hire a larger staff.
My request was to ask for DA's support of Gentoo. Thats it. Don't read anything else into it.
Furthermore, if DA has a problem with releasing versions on so many OS's, then it needs to hire a larger staff.
My request was to ask for DA's support of Gentoo. Thats it. Don't read anything else into it.
Last edited:
nobaloney
NoBaloney Internet Svcs - In Memoriam †
I'm very confused here. Are you saying that 5.x BSD is BS?apryan said:
Hiring a larger staff requires being able to afford that staff. In my opinion for a small company to add more staff for any reason before it can support them with the income they'd develop would only lead to the company having survival problems.
I don't want to see JBMC grow so fast that it ends up going out of business. Slow growth is often good.
Jeff