Hello,

I didn't know were to put this question so I decided to use the first one ;-)

For a new Linux server (Intel based) we need to install a new OS so my question is wich one to choose?

Must I choose Red Hat 6.2 or 7.1 ?
Red Hat or FreeBSD?

It would be helpfull if you could tell me why to choose for that particular OS.

All this is going to be used for webhosting so security is a very BIG issue.

Thank you!
Domenico

FreeBSD. Redhat's history on security issues puts it alongside BIND and sendmail in the category of "you've got to be crazy to use this if you care about security".

I actually don't know that much about Linux to be giving advise. But I did ask the same question to about 10 different people before and not one of them recommended RedHat. Just thought this might be usefull information for you.

Ok, but how about security patches and stuff?
Is freebsd doing that?

Too bad not many Control Panels work on freeBSD. i only know plesk can do it.

Originally posted by Domenico
Ok, but how about security patches and stuff?
Is freebsd doing that?

Yes, of course.


Too bad not many Control Panels work on freeBSD. i only know plesk can do it.

I can't say anything about that, I've never used these. (*cough* crutches for people who shouldn't be allowed onto the internet at all let alone put in charge of production servers *cough* ;) )
There's really no reason why they shouldn't work on FreeBSD though; most of the relevent architecture is the same.

I think Domenico is right. Everyone says that the CPanel and WHM do not work with Free BSD. Also, it is quite impressive that even though most people are against Red Hat because of its lack of security a lot of them are still using it. To the best of my knowledge there are more Red Hat systems out there than Free BSD! ;)

cperciva

Most hosting companys use control panels for their end users not for their techs, can you imagine what a pain it would be to change mail settings add mail boxes etc if you host 1000's of sites. Its a convienence factor for the end user and doesnt neccessarily reflect on the knowledge of the employed techs.

If you need to use an OS that is compatible with CP software I would suggest using SLACKWARE if you need Linux-based but if you can use a Unix-based if your new to BSD use FREEBSD but if you have any knowledge of BSD I would highly suggest OPENBSD.

Slackware is more secure and stable than Redhat due to only needed services are active on initial install. FreeBSD and OpenBSD are considered the top choices for security. Very few security patches for any of the 3 listed above unlike Redhat. Even though Redhat is the choice of most Hosting companies unless you keep up with security issues it may be the wrong choice.

Originally posted by cbaker17
Its a convienence factor for the end user and doesnt neccessarily reflect on the knowledge of the employed techs.

Yes, I know. That's why I put in a ";)".

FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD

ONLY FREEBSD!

More web hosts should put effort implementing FreeBSD, and not just Red Hat Linux because it's "easy" to manage. (Web hosts reading this HINT HINT!)

well yeah BSD rules :/

i like r.h. linux 6.2 ... maybe when i'm done with it then i'll probably try bsd , hum maybe i should try freebsd within 1-2 months from now... i already have the freebsd .iso on cd just need some time to install it :)

Any Unix based OS can be secured if the proper programs are installed on it. What you need to find is a unix based os that has many updates and patches. So you can always stay on top of security and updates etc. For linux, I know slackware is the most solid. FreeBSD is also very solid. As I say you can secure any Unix based OS if you put the latest patches updates, and security software on it.

I have to disagree.
Debian is by far the most secure Linux distribution.
You just can't beat apt-get update && apt-get upgrade.

Slack's nice. But it's missing apt.

Just my opinion, nothing more. :)

Regards,
Vince.

I can't say anything about that, I've never used these. (*cough* crutches for people who shouldn't be allowed onto the internet at all let alone put in charge of production servers *cough* )

Ahem, can you show me a webhosting company (not one with only 3 users) that isn't using a CP for managing it's users? Thought so...

It's the same as not using a tool (dreamweaver) to create a table in HTML with 1000 columns and rows.
"duh, i'm not using a lamers tool like that! I use notepad to type it all out of my head." yeah right...
Reinventing the wheel over and over again is just plain stupid.

Yes, I agree with you that it is really needed to know what's under the panel to know what to do when there are problems so you can solve them quickly. knowing a lot about the system your business is running on is very important but then again don't you have your people to do that? Do you think the CEO of GM knows anything about how a car works technically? Does he give a damn about it? NO, but he sure knows how to sell them.

Tools are here to stay and only a fool doesn't learn how to use them.

And let me tell you that I know the command prompt because I was connected way before the WWW emerged out of it's inventor. You stick at 0.1 while'I'm using 6.0 final with a happy face and more time on my hands

You telnet your way around and add new users and mail adresses for all those people and time it.
When you are ready you can come join me at the cafe. I will buy you a drink anyway ;-) I was there long before you and drunk allready. HIK!

LONG LIVE THE CONTROL PANEL!

Phew, did I say something here?

I agree with Vince on Debian Linux. Not many hosts choose Debian either. The only one I know of is DreamHost.com

Originally posted by Vince
I have to disagree.
Debian is by far the most secure Linux distribution.
You just can't beat apt-get update && apt-get upgrade.

Slack's nice. But it's missing apt.

Just my opinion, nothing more. :)

Regards,
Vince.

Vince,

I believe the reason Slack doesn't have that function is because it is not needed. They have only had like 6 or less security patches since its creation.

I cant say that is is better than Debian though as I have not had the chance to use a Debian based Distro, but I will be sure to do so now after reading your post.

Can you recommend any Debian Distros? The only ones that come to mind are : Debian, Corel, Progeny Debian, and Storm Linux.

Thanks

What about OpenBSD? Progeny (debian)?

Domenico, words of wizdom my friend :)

Actually, I know of several hosting companies that use Debian Linux. However, BSD owns the marketplace by far. As far RedHat goes, well.... as for security you might as well go with Microsoft 2000 Data Center Server. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Linux advocate. However, nothing like harsh reality to open your eyes a bit.....
Most of the Hype-based distributions still have a ways to go before I would bank my company on their ability to perform.

Originally posted by IPC PRO
Actually, I know of several hosting companies that use Debian Linux. However, BSD owns the marketplace by far.

Do you know any BSD hosts you would like to suggest?
Do you know any Debian hosts you would like to suggest?

Is that a test, or a sincere inquiry? Due to my occupation (see my url below), I generally refrain from making suggestions about hosting companies. However, if you are asking in order to try to belittle me thinking that I am blowing smoke............:bawling:

Open BSD would be my first choice if starting from scratch. The problem however as mentioned above is that most CP software is not 100% compatible with it. Thus the reason for using Linux Distro's. I will be installing a Debian based distro on one of our fresh boxes to see how it is, I am just waiting on a recommended Debian Distro.

Originally posted by IPC PRO
Is that a test, or a sincere inquiry? Due to my occupation (see my url below), I generally refrain from making suggestions about hosting companies. However, if you are asking in order to try to belittle me thinking that I am blowing smoke............:bawling:

Absolutely sincere. I have a section in my bookmarks dedicated to web hosts which I may consider doing business with in the future. The more I have, the better. Please let me know of Debian and BSD (FreeBSD pref) hosts.

http://www.pair.com/ only offers FreeBSD......

I personally use Debian itself. Although I've heard very very good things about progeny, I haven't had a chance to check it out yet.
If you choose Debian, be aware that installing 2.2 may seem very old.
But changing like 2 lines in /etc/apt/soutces.list, then apt-get update && apt-get upgrade'ing will give you the most up-to-date distro available.

Basically, in /etc/apt/sources.list, just s/stable/sid/g and you should be set.

And Slack doesn't have the best security record... http://darknet.evilnerds.org/exploits/os/linux/slackware/index.html

Regards,
Vince.

OK, Here is a couple. I'm not going to post my customer base here....

BSD:
1) Virtualis
2) http://www.screaminet.com/webhosting/
3) Also, take a look at this link. Good article, and a lot of feedback from webhosting companies attached. Admittedly, they are slamming NETBSD for the large part, but there is valuable info.
www.bsdtoday.com/2001/January/News394.html+BSD%2Bwebhosting&hl=en

Debian:
Seriously:rolleyes: About all of the orginal LALUG guys. They used to hold meetings at Power.net until they grew out of the space.
Here is a kind of WHT for Debian guys:
http://faqchest.dynhost.com/linux/DEBIAN/debian-01/debian-0101/debian-010101/debian01010816_25588.html

As for recommending a good host, it would definately depend on the area in which you want to colo. However, I really would be shooting my left foot to show you the right one. Besides, there is a lot of Damn good hosting companies that have contacts in here. These guys probably have the capability to host you with whatever OS you want. They choose not to because of these reasons;
1) They are more familiar with another OS, and feel they can better service you by sticking to a platform they consider tried and true, based on their own real-world experience.
2) Like every hosting company, they face a miriad of problems on a daily basis. If they stick to only one or two OS's on the servers in their facility, they don't need to hire six-figure technicians and charge you $800 per month to pay for those technicians. Consolidation means they can concentrate on fixing the problem, not learning how to tweak a new distribution while your server is dead to the world.
3) Liabilies. Most hosting companies guarantee a certain amount of uptime. When they guarantee uptime, it translates to the golden ABC rule...
a) "I'm guaranteeing the uptime, so don't bring your Fry's Electronics box in here expecting me to host it. You host on servers I KNOW WON'T FAIL ME!!"
b) "I'm guaranteeing the uptime, so don't dictate to me how to configure my equipment, based on an article you read in the NewbieHosts Post. I'm going to configure it with WHAT I KNOW WORKS!!"
c) Same thing as C, but take out "configure", and add in Operating System".

What does all of that mean? It means there is no standard in the industry. These guys "standards" are the standards created in their own company, based on trial and error. If you simply want to compile a list, go to www.google.com, and type in
1) BSD+webhosting
2) Debian+Webhosting
3) Redhat+webhosting
4) Plug&Pray+Webhosting

/etc/etc/etc/......

No one is mentioning Solaris. We only use Solaris inhouse and its a rock solid OS.

The OS shouldn't really matter when your looking for a hosting company. What you should look for is competent hosting companies to properly work with the OS.

A hosting company should have competent people on staff to patch up the OS and fine tune the OS when problems arise.

We run FreeBSD for our mail systems. Apparently it handles scaling and security very well.

You can also do some research on what hosts are running at www.netcraft.com .

We run SUSELinux for web.

Franc

i would go from freebsd

Originally posted by jeff
i would go from freebsd

Does this mean you wouldn't use it? What are your reasons?

What would you suggest as an alternative?

Your website www.gopopup.com is running very slowly. You may have a problem with your webserver. It could be a runaway process or your server could be under tremendous load.

I would look into it.

Cheers,
Franc