Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 71533 2006-08-08 09:06:00 Which server distro? technicianxp (6463) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
477107 2006-08-08 09:06:00 Hey everyone

We're planning on setting up a Linux server to provide a storage drive for multimedia files on our LAN with two 80GB discs running in software RAID 0 (don't worry about the redundancy part we're more concerned right now with getting more storage. Backup systems will be in place once we're underway).

I've tried using Ubuntu 5.10 and 6.06, but both have not done too well in this role. I've now decided on trying a different distro, and consultancy with a Mac and Linux specialist has led me to Fedora Core and CentOS.

What I'd like to know now is, is one of these our best choice and if so which one? Are there any other ditros which may fit the bill?

The server's main jobs will be to serve a single share via both SMB and AFP (netatalk), plus possibly running Apache2. We're looking at using a distro with a GUI.

The hardware is a Compaq Proliant ML330e with a 800MHz P3 CPU, 384MB of ECC RAM, 2x 80GB (data) and 1x 10GB (system) disk.

All suggestions are welcome. 		technicianxp (6463)
477108 2006-08-08 09:37:00 Well, I'm certainly not an expert in this area, but this is what I've done
www.howtoforge.com
and my son who is involved as a developer and erstwhile sysadmin in the UK swears by Debian for a server.
Although having tried Ubuntu, it might not be your "cup of tea" either, I'm posting this as it might be helpful :confused: 		jcr1 (893)
477109 2006-08-08 09:52:00 Hmmm, Debian would be my choice (I think even Apache 2 is on there). Security Updates are a breeze, and samba and netatalk are all based on a few config files, so you just read up on the options you want. You could use Webmin as a GUI for administration (I'm not sure of your GUI requirement).

Or you could find an old G4 mac and put OS X Server on it...(all GUI based there but I can't resist tweaking the config files by hand and using provided command-line tools)... 		gibler (49)
477110 2006-08-08 10:25:00 If you are used to Ubuntu, then go with Debian other wise I recommend Centos.

Either one, is very easy to setup as a server with moderate Linux skills.

Fedora isn't good for servers as it is a development OS. :badpc: 		superuser (7693)
477111 2006-08-08 10:50:00 Xandros released a server earlier this year. Have a look at xandros.com

It is not a free one though.

Jim 		Hhel (8073)
477112 2006-08-08 10:56:00 If you are used to Ubuntu, then go with Debian other wise I recommend Centos.

Either one, is very easy to setup as a server with moderate Linux skills.

Fedora isn't good for servers as it is a development OS. :badpc:
Fedora is fine for servers... 		dolby digital (5073)
477113 2006-08-09 03:32:00 Thanks for all the suggestions.

I have no problems with Ubuntu. In fact I have Kubuntu on a secondary HDD on my home computer too. However, the part where it's failed has been in integrating Samba with Active Directory (which is the most vital and difficult part of the setup). It has continually failed to fetch users from it, despite numerous attempts to get it going.

I've found that a majority of the instructions I find on the net are generally for Red Hat (or Fedora), so I'm thinking I may have more luck by using it instead of Ubuntu.

In saying that though I have also been recommended Debian by many people as a good server solution, so I may come back to it if Fedora lets me down.

Anyway thanks for all the help guys. 		technicianxp (6463)
477114 2006-08-09 05:09:00 I have used both Fedora Core (4 and 5) and CentOS (4.3) in servers.

I would recommend Fedora if you're after bleeding-edge; it's also (in my experience) a fair bit faster than CentOS. CentOS is the way to go if you're after a thoroughly tested, 'stable' OS - CentOS is actually just (well almost) Redhat Enterprise Linux, but just repackaged without the Redhat-copyrighted stuff (mostly graphics). 		Erayd (23)
1