Want to set up a serious linux server. No memes /g/ (I believe

Gentoo

Depends on what you're trying to run. I prefer CentOS, but home/hobbyist packages, say something like deluged, are going to be more up to date on Ubuntu, if even available on CentOS.

>>56041337
Windows 2000 Server

>>56041337
Ubuntu is what i run mainly. I perfer it over RHEL based OS's. Preference.

CentOS is used a lot in Enterprise(tm) since it's basically RHEL so you can trust it.
As >>56041440 said, some packages might not be up-to-date but nothing prevents you from adding repos specific to those or compiling from source.

go for ubuntu if it's your first time

>>56041472
It isn't my first time, that's the thing. I need a rock solid OS to handle many terabytes per day of web traffic, we high quality support and good repos.

>>56041492

Windows Server 2012

>>56041337
Ubuntu or CentOS, just make sure you use the latest kernel.

Or you can go crazy and use Arch.

I'm partial to plain Debian myself

>>56041492
BSD
Debian
Win Server 2012

>>56041492
If that was true than you should already know what to choose you faggot.

>>56041492
FreeBSD.

After all, it's what 4chan runs on!

File: 1461426252273.png (181KB, 470x463px)

181KB, 470x463px

>>56041337
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

>>56041337
hardened gentoo

Hardened Windows XP

>>56041492
Then go with CentOS. I work for a company with over 1 billion web transactions happening per day, yes billion. We use CentOS

>>56044143
Shit Actually we're over 4 billion transactions per day now, Anyway, CentOS.

>>56041337

Centos is the thing I see in the actually working people world.

Everyone praises the fuck out of Debian and I dont know why I never see it in the real world.

Redhat is the version of centos where you pay for support. Which is worth it if you are actually in a business making money just for the time it saves you figuring shit out yourself.

Ubuntu is babies first and not bad if you are just fucking around.

>>56044191
Can you code a program to remove 0.01 cent from any unequal nimber transaction and get rich

>le hackereman face

Listen up and listen good.

Boring office stuff like spread sheets: Red Hat, CentOS
Gaming and noobs general: Ubuntu
Entry-level coding: Debian, Fedora

Reale serious coding, top-end server stuff and hacking: Arch

>>56044516
lol they aren't financial transactions, they're mostly API calls from the front end.

>>56044539
>arch
>real serious server stuff

You think any major company is running their platform on arch? Lol have you even worked anywhere with more than 1 customer or 20 employees?

>>56041337
ESXi

>>56044571
Most hardcore experts use Arch as it is apparent on /g/. Educate yourself.

>>56044585
I like you anon.

>>56041337
Centos is best for servers. Ubuntu requires adding repos or building from source for some server packages.

>>56044581
KVM/Linux is more reliable. I.e. Linux doesn't shit itself on memory errors (esxi throws a psod).

>>56044143
>>56044191
Hi Red Hat.

Debian or CentOS. Really, both are fine.

>so many ubuntu
Why? I thought ubuntu was only good at being a friendly gui distro.
What advantages does ubuntu have over debian, on a server?

>>56041337
>>56044581
Use proxmox for container and VM virtualization.

>>56044767
Talking about Ubuntu server, not desktop.

File: screenshot-area-2016-08-12-082711.png (298KB, 996x924px)

298KB, 996x924px

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?ostype=Linux&category=Server&origin=All&basedon=All&notbasedon=None&desktop=All&architecture=All&package=All&rolling=All&isosize=All&netinstall=All&status=Active

>>56041492

Debian

>>56041337
debian

>>56044321
>Ubuntu is babies first and not bad if you are just fucking around.
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Wikitech
lmao

>>56041337
debian, with openRC

>>56044767
Depending on what you're using the server for, it has more up-to-date packages. Normally wouldn't need it, but again, depends what you're doing.

>>56044539
Arch is the distro for NEETS who want to fuck around. No-one actually uses it for anything serious.

>>56045044
>>56044629

As someone who supports multiple vcenters, with about 90 clusters of various sizes, psods are very rare and usually linked to degrading hardware.

On that note, I do use proxmox on my home server and it is awesome, I would not consider it to be as enterprise ready as VMware though.

File: 404470_3315763250579_1163146335_33509989_1149215556_n.jpg (63KB, 537x720px)

63KB, 537x720px

I was just wondering, would CentOS be good for HTPC's?

>>56041337
>AIX
>Tru64
>HP-UX
one of these, don't listen to anyone else

>>56041337
>Linux server
If one makes the presumption that the modern IT is all about the internet, then you have to ask yourself
'Does Linux even have a choice in this matter ?'

A modern computing system is not one that is run from the command line - it is a system that is tied in with the internet Cloud. Just have a look at Windows 10 Server with Cortana and OneDrive for an example of this done right.

You need the outlook to connect in with the mass of email flowing around us every day. And then there is document collaboration - the sharing of Wordfiles and Excels between users across state boundries ! Voice over IP, cloud enabled 'Surface' computing, and voice command interfaces - all tied together with .NET and the OneDrive.

The driving force behind this internet is the Microsoft Sharepoint Server - a central peice of systems software which connects all these end points together, in a synergistic kaleidoscope that achieves both balance and symmetry.

The smart Vendors know that in order to get ahead in the future IT, that means integrating with the Cloud.

Linux has nothing on the Cloud.

>>56046599
Even Microsoft doesn't fall for that bullshit anymore. They make a big deal about supporting Linux on Azure.

>>56044539
nice bait

>>56041337
>server

What ix this, 2014? Build services, not servers. L2AWS/Google Cloud

Setvers died over a year ago

>>56046599
t. microsoft advertisement

>>56046710
what distro should i choose on AWS?

>>56046802
Amazon linux

>>56041337
Debian or Cent. SuSE is supposedly good as well, but I never spent much time with it.

>>56046710

wtf do you think L2aws and Google cloud run on?

>>56044321
>Centos is the thing I see in the actually working people world.
100+ customers with thousands of servers and centos/suse enterprise number together have lower number than rhel 5/6/7

then there too are some special snowflakes that run Tru64, IBM servers with AIX, HP servers with HP-UX. which hardly outnumber your regular linux distros

of course we are talking about customers that are multinational corporations with 100+ / 1000+ servers with tens of thousands of employees and milions of customers that in some instances vastly outnumber your regular local firms / smaller govs

>>56046832
why not debian or ubuntu?

>>56045381
/this

I run arch on my XPS because it's bleeding edge and i'm happy with it

would never use it for production server

>>56047004
Because theres no reason to use them. Amazon linux is less of a hassle.

Ubuntu and Debian are just fine. But you shouldnt waste time tinkering with an OS. Get building.

>>56046599
>The driving force behind this internet is the Microsoft Sharepoint Server
What are you on, and why aren't you sharing?

>Linux has nothing on the Cloud.
HADOOP, CEPH, and Amazon AWS for $1600, Alex?


Someone's trying hard at new pasta, but still sounding like a grade school retard.

>>56041337
So, with near 1000 machines in deployment, here is what I can tell you.

Ubuntu - For OpenStack deployments it was turn key. Hit a couple buttons, everything is deployed.

CentOS - Not quite as turn key out of the gate, but a little stronger once configured. In the end, new deployments are now running CentOS.

>>56047501
it's obviously ironic anon

>>56041337
Ubuntu Server has worked pretty well for me for something like a decade. Pretty much like a slightly more updated Debian.

CentOS is also a very solid choice. It's mainly going to be preference between the two.

Debian hardened

for personal usage there is not any relevant difference between CentOS, Ubuntu and Debian besides your preference to either type yum or apt-get.

>>56044679
If he was true RedHat he would recommend RHEL.

>>56041337
I always run CentOS on production servers. Some people I know run Fedora, but that can get a little too bleeding edge for my taste.

>>56043424

>Not OpenBSD

>>56047875
>Ubuntu
>Pretty much like a slightly more updated Debian.

Wut? Ubuntu gets its packages from Debian

>>56041337
Gentoo

didn't we have this exact thread with same pic already?

>>56041337
Centos
FreeNAS for network storage

>>56043734
hardened swiss cheese still has gaping holes in it

>>56045792
You probably want Fedora

>>56046710
>not having hardware access to your servers
You fucked up m8

Besides, things like clinics have to comply with HIPAA, so that shit needs to be locked up and under control.

>>56048241
No, Ubuntu's package manager is based on Debian's aptitude. Ubuntu has its own repositories.

>>56041337
Go with ubuntu server, set up automatic security upgrades and health/status monitoring

>>56047536
>muh OpenShit

>>56045761
You're right, it's absolutely not at the point where it could be used for enterprise, but I've found that it's a pretty accessible way to get into Linux virtualization. And the community is crazy good. I hate to talk about plebbit, but the r/homelab is great.

>>56041411
Could Gentoo do a great job? What about Funtoo?

>>56050848
No

Would an old shitbox that a friend gave me make an all right server?

>>56051447
If the hardware is in decent shape and runs stable.

The sysadmin at my old highschool used to use an old 486 as the router and it was totally fine for the computer labs we had. This was back in 2003 or so. Everything you did that left the schools local area network went through that machine.

Literally nobody complained about the network performance until after they found out about the 486. I don't think they would've complained about performance at all if they didn't know how old that machine was.

I just thought it was cool that something that old could do a perfectly good job at serving my schools needs. It wasn't too slow at all.