How stable is Ubuntu 16.04 for server usage? Should I upgrade

Find out what packages are installed and being used on the server. Find out when support for trusty ends. Find out if any packages are currently vulnerable etc... Find out if xenial will support all the packages you have installed and shit. Then do of or don't whatever.

Oh shit its not even trusty. Yes upgrade. You are at risk of making this a "legacy" issue. Nip this in the bud

What about using a real professional distro, like Oracle Linux or RHEL?

>>55909747
Can you explain to me the advantages of oracle Linux? Rhel I can understand as they can push out patches and whatever but unless you are running some sort of oracle software why would you need oracle Linux?

>>55909774
Assuming you are working for a technological enterprise, you probably using Oracle software

>>55909648
>How stable is Ubuntu 16.04 for server usage?

Ubuntu 16 is a buggy mess

Upgrade to 14.04 instead

Been using it for a couple months, seems fine.

>>55909648
Convert one server to a virtual machine, upgrade it and test it thoroughly

Never personally had to manage an Ubuntu server, I know they are out there and popular but at my last 3 jobs they've all been CentOS/RHEL based and it's been solid.

My last company used Ubuntu Server 14.04 without any major issues.

>>55909648
>They're still running 12.04


what did he mean by this?

>>55909648
Do not upgrade from 12.04 to 16.04.
Do a fresh install, or stay on 12.04 until its support ends in 2017.

I just updated a 12.04 box at work to 16.04 and it's noticeably better. Also, 12.04 is getting axed fairly soon.

My home server is a headless 16.04 rig. I must say it's nicer to work with once it's up and running.

I reformatted both machines so I could move from MBR to GPT, so I can't weigh in on how the "upgrade" process went.

>>55909648
Update to 14.04 dude

File: 1361065380458.png (200KB, 492x341px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 492x341px

>>55909648
>upgrade my servers
>on a non-Debian distro
fun times ahead.

Ubuntu LTS is just Debian testing and testing isnt the most stable thing in the world

>>55912829
>Ubuntu 14.04
>Debian testing
Nope

>>55909648
>upgrading linux servers

>>55909648
Ubuntu 16.04 has been very stable for servers. (We run about 20 of them, and the upgrade process has almost always been painless)

It's less stable on desktops, though, in my experience.

>>55909806
The only strictly Sun/Oracle software (not counting zfsonlinux) we use at work is NFS and the shitty ILOM on sun SPs.

Both of them are absolute nightmares to use, debug, and maintain. The ILOM is slow, buggy and crashes so often that the manual has dedicated sections to all the ways you can hard-reset it in the event of a crash. (Including what to do if none of the mechanisms for communicating with it are working, which is just a sad thing to write)

NFS has basically no real debugging tools available, so if something goes wrong you usually have to pull out wireshark to see what exactly is happen. The failure modes are typically fantastic, either being silent permission denied errors or the client machine completely locking itself up.

>>55911977
My personal server is on 16.04.1 now too. I used to run both debian jessie and gentoo, but I'm much happer with ubuntu 16.04 than I was with either of the previous

>>55909648

You're at an awkward time. You should really wait a couple of months more before you move to 16.04. You could probably use that time to test the features/apps you're using.

woah brev.

yeah, it is good, most of the trouble people have been having is skylake and desktop related. server is gud

>>55909648
Update to 14.04. Ubuntu 16 isn't bad for personal use but still has some issues that need to be sorted out.

>>55909648
why the fuck are you using Ubuntu in a production enviroment.

Debian or RHEL is the way to go.

if your boss is too cheap for RHEL CentOS.

>>55915601
We use both CentOS and Ubuntu servers and honestly I'm a billion times happier with the Ubuntu servers.

Mostly because /etc/sysconfig is a massive piece of shit. Every time I even look at /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-X I just have to throw up. (Comparing it to /etc/network/interfaces)

File: screenfetch1.png (471KB, 1656x906px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1656x906px

>>55909648
16.04 server is running great on my home server. I also set up a server for a client and it has been running well since I set it up a couple months ago.

>>55915648
> Every time I even look at /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-X
I believe you don't have to look at it every day.

>>55915648
Another thing that pisses me off about CentOS is how little hardware support it has out of the box.

For example, the PCI NICs that I like to use when I want to plug some machine into a second network works out of the box on Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. and every other major distro but on CentOS I first need to hunt down some third-party rpm source for the drivers because they disable it in their kernels

>>55915648
umm what the fuck are you doing?

everything is done via nmcli now.
theirs no need to edit config files for networking now.

>>55915760
>NetworkManager
If you enable network manager on a server you are a fucking retard

>>55909701
>what is LTS
12.04 is LTS and I think it's still supported.
Supported means security fixes are backported.

>>55915797
lmao, no.

Theirs nothing wrong with network manager, expecially when you configure it right, its the new standard for rhel.

>>55915869
Yeah except for the part where it fucks with everything from DNS to wake-on-lan to IPv6 in sometimes unsolvable ways

For example, good luck setting up NM to set up your resolvconf with multiple search domains, each of which have multiple name servers, in the right order

>>55916077
I haven't had any problems, used it to set up 50+ vms with ipv6 the works.

you must be retarded or something.

>>55916189
In the IT industry, “I haven't had any problems” is code for “my use cases are not as advanced as yours”.

Yeah, no shit the tools designed to dumb down configuration work fine if you don't actually need to configure anything

Hell, you wouldn't even need networkmanager for just setting up VMs with IPv6, that's what RA is for..