The server operating system should choose CentOS or Debian/ubuntu

First of all, I would like to invite you players, you do not have their own recent new play on what you feel good, and then wantonly recommended what good! Negative points of responsibility good bad! Someone is a server, sometimes choose the wrong release version will be painful to die a group of people!

Yes, you now finally found that there is a version called Ubuntu, so cool ah, so many bags, casually apt-get, 30,000 bags lying in the warehouse without compiling. That's great! Almost all software is available in the latest version! Well, after two days you found out that Ubuntu was originally from Debian, Debian is called cattle ah, full community operation, the number of packages is a bit. Two days to find Gentoo, whoa, bull! Performance optimization, compile and compile, configure, configure, and configure, streamlined to the extreme. After two days of Gentoo play tired, is not compiling it ~ ah? The original Arch Ah, this is good, want to compile the compilation, do not want to compile the default package. Then 2 months did not Pacman updated system, update all hung up.

Your ideology, walking at any stage, considers this phase to be the best choice. But that's not the case, it's just your interest.

MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA

To discuss this issue, first know the difference between the two major releases. RedHat and Debian.
One, version definition

RedHat is a release version maintained by Red Hat Corporation. Its RedHat 9 is the last release to be named RedHat. After RH9, the version began to be divided into community-maintained Fedora and enterprise-used EL. And what we call CentOS X is compiled from RHEL x. So in essence, the target user of CentOS is the server of the enterprise.

CentOS is a release concept, what is the release concept? When a version is set, the vast majority of its packages, including Kernel, have already been versioned. Under this release, there is no special case, the large version number is not changed.

For example, a Kernel version of CentOS 6:

2.6.32-358.el6.x86_64

2.6.32 is the kernel version number, 358 is the packaged version number, and the packaged version indicates that the package was packaged several times. It is normal for RHEL to pack a kernel 500 700 times.

Another example of some software, 1.1.3 is a version, if the software itself is defined, the last one is the bugfix version, the penultimate is the function version, then you in RHEL, you will rarely see feature updates! You'll only see the bugfix update! That is, you will only see the minor version update.

Debian is a distributed version that is maintained and contributed by the community, and it is decentralized, packaged, and organized by the community.

Debian is a concept of release that has no real meaning. Debian has many warehouses, stable,testing,unstable, experimental. The way the Debian organization system is, a software first into the experimental, put a period of time, there is bug fix bug, no bug, over a period of time moved into the unstable, so the cycle eventually moved to stable inside. So in this case, the Debian system is not a stable version of the concept. Today you use kernel 3.2.1-87, tomorrow will update you to kernel 3.3.2-5.

--– Supplemental Content ——-

I think I have explained my so-called release concept very clearly, but there are people in the comments who are telling me that Debian is a release. The release I'm talking about is not the concept of a time line, called a name. This is the concept of version maintenance.

@ Liu Shiwei says Debian is the same, okay, I'll prove it to you.

Your LINUX-IMAGE-3.2.0-4-AMD64 package details from here debian-in Wheezy can be obtained now Debian stable Linux kernel packaged, downloaded, decompressed, in

There is a changelog below the USR/SHARE/DOC/LINUX-IMAGE-3.2.0-4-AMD64 directory. Debian, grep a bit:

grep wheezy changelog. Debian
Linux (3.2.57-3) wheezy; Urgency=medium
Linux (3.2.57-2) wheezy; Urgency=medium
Linux (3.2.57-1) wheezy; Urgency=medium
Linux (3.2.54-2) wheezy; Urgency=high
Linux (3.2.54-1) wheezy; Urgency=high
Linux (3.2.53-2) wheezy; Urgency=high
Linux (3.2.53-1) wheezy; Urgency=medium
Linux (3.2.51-1) wheezy; Urgency=low
Linux (3.2.46-1+DEB7U1) wheezy-security; Urgency=low
Linux (3.2.46-1) wheezy; Urgency=low
Linux (3.2.41-2+DEB7U2) wheezy-security; Urgency=highl
Inux (3.2.41-2+DEB7U1) wheezy-security; Urgency=high

At least inside the wheezy (stable), he went from 3.2.41 to 3.2.57, while ... You can see that each version is packaged 1-2 times, 1-2 times! and Debian's unstable to stable really just walk around.

Linux (3.2.41-2+DEB7U1) was the first stable version, and his previous version was

Linux (3.2.41-2) unstable, OK, 3.2.41 the second time, add a patch and it becomes stable.

Linux (3.2.41-1) unstable, got it, 41 hit it once.

Linux (3.2.39-2) unstable, 39 also two times.

From this process, you can see that Debian in general, or in the following Kernel Source, why? No one! It is better to rely on fragmented people to patch patches than to depend on Kernel's own minor version updates.
Where's RedHat?

Put a release Note for RHEL 6.4

Https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/6.4_Technical_Notes/kernel.html

RHEL, is not with the kernel source of the small version number, their own integration bugfix, mainly security-related patches.
Why not with kernel source?

The main or the target user is different, just like I drive this piece to explain. RHEL's target user, the enterprise's Server, his Kernel inside, already too many things have been replaced. disk, network card, a variety of drivers. Kernel source, though only a minor version, is not very reliable. Frequent take over the risk is also large.

Kernel actually go to 2.6, there is no real stable concept. Anyway, it's all the way forward. Of course, 2.6.32.xx is really bugfix-dominated. But this volume is too big, all kinds of trivial, RHEL is not all brought in.

You have to argue with me about the version of the problem, OK, I do not argue with you, Debian Stable is a version of ~ Are you satisfied? This is a kernel Pack 2 times of the state, you love to use the good. That doesn't matter.

But a version of it is just stable,testing I have never seen.

To tell the truth, I really spent my mind looking for a bit more information about Debian,

11 entered the stable of 6.0, and there was indeed an update recently, in the APR 2014.

Http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/l/linux-2.6/linux-2.6_2.6.32-48squeeze5_changelog

The Lenny, which was released in 09, was 5.0, and it was hard to find information at all. If anyone can find Lenny trouble for a kernel changelog

-Supplemental End ——-

And the successor of Ubuntu, he has the concept of release, such as 9.04, 10.06, etc., when he determined the release, he will not make too much version changes in this version.

But the problem is that he learned the shape of CentOS and did not learn the essence of CentOS. Why? Because he wants to pursue new (two editions a year), but also want to learn to eat the server market. This is one thing that is completely contradictory to each other.

New, good to do, as long as follow the Debian Walk, experimental warehouse is always the newest thing. Take it, test it, repack it, release it!

Stability? (Ubuntu-server) This is difficult, it requires constant human input, Debian will not help you do it naturally. Do it yourself? Ubuntu tried several times and I didn't see success at the moment. Almost all of them gave up hastily.
Second, the power of maintenance

Do you know what it's called to maintain a release version of a server?

CentOS 4.0 2005-03-09

CentOS 4.9 2011-03-02

6 years

Ubuntu 8.04 LTS April 24, 2008

Ubuntu 8.04.4 LTS January 28, 2010

1 Years 9 months

What did you say about LTS???

Ubuntu 10.04 LTS April 29, 2010

Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS February 16, 2012

Well, what about LTS?

Say End of the Date is 3 years is a joke, as long as the next release, the last release received a poor number of updates.

This is the strength of RedHat! You just use my release, you don't have to worry! What about Ubuntu? Even if it's lts, LTS will hardly update after the new version comes out. A patch? Never seen! That is, the real life of LTS is 6 months-1 years. Do you dare to use it for your company?

One day a software burst out similar to the recent OpenSSL, with CentOS 5 users get the upgraded RPM the next day. A large version of the update was received by a Debian user, and the dependencies must be updated glibc, kernel, and so on. Users in Ubuntu receive an official reply: "Apt-get Dist-upgrade"

This is the difference in maintenance for these releases.
We say back to RHEL, many people do not understand, think Ubuntu "new", RHEL "old".

There is a Broadcom network card on your server, and CentOS 6 (2.6.32-358.el6.x86_64) users modinfo a bit

FileName:/lib/modules/2.6.32-358.6.1.el6.x86_64/kernel/drivers/net/tg3.ko
Firmware:tigon/tg3_tso5.bin
Firmware:tigon/tg3_tso.binfirmware:tigon/tg3.bin
version:3.124

Debian Testing (3.12-1) users modinfo a bit

FileName:/lib/modules/3.12-1-amd64/kernel/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.ko
Firmware:tigon/tg3_tso5.bin
Firmware:tigon/tg3_tso.bin
Firmware:tigon/tg3.bin
version:3.133

Do you know which version of the TG3 drive http://kernel.org's latest 2.6.32 belt is?

#define Drv_module_version "3.102"
#define DRV_MODULE_RELDATE "September 1, 2009"

is CentOS "old"? Who is driving the latest drive into the old kernel? Who is testing the compatibility of the new driver with the old kernel? RH Ah!! These are the manpower, these are the financial resources ah.

RH ensures stable, compatible, and as far as possible to the server users the most complete device matching, the latest driver support. And that's all! You don't have to worry about stability, compatibility, because RH does not have a large version of the update, and does not bring huge feature updates.
There is one more example:

The RPS feature in the Google RFS patch in Linux kernel Linux 2.6.35.

This is simply what Linux server users dream of the function good, you can no longer worry about the multi-core CPU is wasted, you do not have to spend a lot of money to buy expensive multi-IRQ network card. But you have to 2.6.35 to have oh ~

But you don't have to worry, CentOS 6 (2.6.32) has integrated RPS into the 2.6.32 kernel.

Did you see Ubuntu do this kind of thing? What is Ubuntu doing? In the busy this year to send a version of Ah!

What does RHEL do? Because his users are servers! RPS is a kind of thing that a PC can't use at all.

I go back to the beginning. I also used Ubuntu to do the product, although not a server. But the final result is not good. I have heard of a colleague of the home company using Ubuntu as a server, thousand other quantities. I had a little chat and I was almost as miserable as I had predicted.
The basic pain flow is this.

Encounter a problem---Find only update software version to resolve--this own current version has not been provided by the software version---found itself compiled however, relying too heavy--and decided to dist-upgrade----- > Test Dist-upgrade 10 Machines, 2 units succeeded, 8 failed, the phenomenon of failure, and the pain of solving various problems, such as the success of Dist-upgrade---discovery company business procedures need to recompile--communication with developers Explain the importance of upgrading--developers re-debug, test some of the columns to the new version of the library and deliver the new version

The basic CentOS user is this: The following is a recent real conversation

"XXX, news did you see that OpenSSL blew the leak?"

"Ah? I don't know, I'll see."

—-

Puppet, after 10 minutes of operation.

"Boss, the patch has come out, updated, SSL has been automatically restarted the Apache."

End ~

And finally, to explain, my previous comments

Don't blame the system for not being good. Recommended Debian/ubuntu running Server is a very irresponsible thing. ”

Any Linux distribution, in theory, is the same. Just the convenience of operation, some trouble! Yes, Yum is weaker than apt (this is the difference between enterprise maintenance and community maintenance, the enterprise does not need so many functions for its own maintenance) but any effect that can be achieved on the A release must be implemented on B. You can even play with Gentoo's idea of playing CentOS, compiling it! You hit RPM yourself, you cut your own dependency, you can say trouble, but you can't say it's not possible.

So, I'm going to say it again: "Don't use it, don't blame the system!" It's not discrimination, it's not sarcasm, it's a place where you can spend your time more useful when you recognize the truth!

The second sentence! " Recommended Debian/ubuntu running Server is a very irresponsible thing. "This is the lesson of blood and tears! You don't want to hear it, but there are people who are risking their" unfriendly "hats to tell you the truth!

Let me add that there is no disrespect. But most of the circles with gentoo-similar to the watercress or VeryCD such a company, you then make this decision-making people are basically interested in their interests > company interests. Potentially, this is actually an irresponsible behavior that will directly lead to an increase in the company's maintenance costs.

Do you really think that you can do the same with Gentoo, CentOS?

Do you really think that the quality of a small team of you will be better than the staff of the RH company?

If you really think so, you can only prove that you didn't use it at the time.

If I tell you today, I want to do an HTTP server, I do not use Apache without nginx, in order to performance I want to use XXX as the basis for rewriting a set out. I believe most people will ask the same question, "Do you think you can write better than ng?"

Look back at that time yourself.

I do not wish to turn this answer into a dispute between people of different versions, but it is meaningless. I'm just saying, in the present state, the best is still CentOS. I personally on the PC VM, with Gentoo, home homeserver with Debian, the company is naturally CentOS

As for the Debian server, if you like it OK, there will not be too much problem. But really not as good as CentOS worry.

Ubuntu....... It's really miserable.

Gentoo ... no Zuo no die

Additions to Debian:

Comment 1:

Debian is a good choice in many less important environments. [It is not so important that the boss will not count the money with you even if it is down for more than 10 minutes or half an hour. ]

Why?

1. A sufficient number of packages.

2. The testing has acceptable reliability. (compared to Arch) 3. Testing has a very good software update speed.

3. Testing does not have release features and is always smoothly upgraded (as with Arch Gentoo).

Fedora, like Ubuntu, has release features, but once the new version comes out, the old version is rarely maintained. At the same time Dist-upgrade process is not friendly, experience is very bad. So if I have a personal choice, the school room I will also use Debian. In my reply, I also mentioned that my homeserver was made of Debian. In fact, it used to be arch, but arch stability is really poor, a pacman-syu play dead you. After having tasted the pain, switched to Debian testing, ran for about 2 years, the feeling is still very reliable.

@ Yimeng Reply to the following comments:

Gentoo can inspire feelings------so the efficiency of the company's interests are protected. Hahaha, you won. Or to the occasion, 60 is passable 6000? I also used Gentoo to do the product, but not the server. TVU Networks's x86 product is what I decided to transfer to Gentoo. In this product, very good use of Gentoo custom convenient, smooth update features, because the tvupack need to adapt to the latest USB Modem. The only regret is that I didn't have time to give it a set of binary distribution systems. If there is a chance next time, I will find a way to do a set. Compiling on the Server, not my style, too dirty. I once reduced CentOS 5 to 96 RPM and still can boot. CentOS 6 can only do more than 100.

However, it is still a matter of separation. I also spend a lot of Time debugging vim writing bash to write the python, but I began to write Cocoa, I decisively give up vim, must xcode.

I guess a lot of newbies (well, it's time for show B ge) feel that the discussions between the distributions are similar to the religious discussion of the early various development languages [bashing].

This is not the case, because familiarity with the use of a release version is far less expensive than familiarity with a development language. 5-10 years, enough for you to familiarize yourself with the mainstream releases. Enough for a master to make the most of the best, suitable.

I am not any release of the powder, I am in the company server with CentOS, I am using Debian in HomeServer, I use Debian in Cubieboard, I use the openwrt on the router, I use OSX on the PC, I use Gentoo on the PC VM 。 This is the highest level of conditions.

In fact, Yimeng is to take personal interest = = Company Benefits ha, I gave a praise, praise is praise this sentiment. There are a lot of things, you like enough, I respect everyone's love, you don't really need too many reasons, I did this line is just to "like".

Besides, Yimeng bosses are out to praise, I have what to say, haha.

Comments under the @ Vegetarian bun:

I can understand you, but I don't agree with you. Why?

Because I also have the use of XXX as the courage of the age, I think this is very interesting, very cool, very special, I want to be different, or I tell myself I can learn more things (yes, indeed can).

But when I go through this phase, I look back. I know it's two o ', 1. This process is valuable, without this process, will not become today's me. 2. This process takes too much time. I have invested 100% more experience than others to get 30% more knowledge than others. Maybe there's a better way to go?

Today, my colleague came to tell me that he wanted to compile Apache himself and put it on the line, I told him. You don't have to do this, with CentOS comes with you can, save the time you can really understand the performance-related parameters of Apache (believe me, many people are confused), you can also study how to let developers in the controlled environment free release of new versions, It also has a good fallback function without the need for operational intervention. You can also write a system that verifies that a backup database is loaded normally once a week.

Believe me, there are so many jobs in the real operation that are worth doing and no one is doing. They are all more meaningful than where you are configure.

Well, on the age, it should be senior, RH 6 ah? Check out the 1999 thing, I'm still in junior high school.

@ Paper Paste

1. "Redhat series so I have no problem, but you pay the user?"

So we're talking about CentOS? You don't know about their relationship? Go and see.

2. "For the support time problem, the support time is short a bit has already told you, this does not become the spray point bar" Ah? Ubuntu tried several times and I didn't see success at the moment. Almost all of them gave up hastily. ”

Ubuntu says LTS is 3 years, can be seen from the maintenance time of history, rarely maintained to three years.

That's what I'm going to say. You don't know that LTS is 3 years?

3. "One day a software burst a bug similar to recent OpenSSL"

Well, you quoted my exact words, please note that what I want to say is "similar". And not just this time of OpenSSL.

Speaking of the restoration of OpenSSL, your statement is not correct.

This time, the OpenSSL fix has two ways, one is to update to the OpenSSL iteration, and the other is to recompile the feature that will cause the problem to close. It's not just a way to fix upstream.

RedHat should have taken the second, because his update was 1.0.1e-16 just the packing number was added. (Note that RedHat or as much as possible to maintain the version, I do not know whether Debian did this, or upgrade to 1.0.1f?) Maybe the Lord knows?

This is an off-topic ... What I'm trying to say here is that the way Debian is organized can be updated, especially in the testing environment, because Debian is moving forward in testing. For example, a relies on b,b to go forward, a has encountered a Bug, so in the next update, A and B may be updated at the same time. This phenomenon is present in the testing. The Stable should not.

I have also acknowledged in some comments that I have exaggerated descriptions of Debian.

4. You want to use Squeeze, wheezy is your thing, because you so use, so I do not use, it shows that I do not understand? You are too flattering yourself, at least give some reason.

And I have said at the end of the answer, you use Debian as a server, there is no big problem.

I do not recommend the reason I have already described very clearly, kernel is much weaker than RedHat, you want to have a rebuttal to this come.

This short response to my answer in the comments, at least reflects the three points you "do not understand" things, I think you should see more.

In addition, be polite, no one will treat you as a fool. There are a lot of people in a situation, by attacking others to reflect their own tall. In fact, really strong people, there is no need to do so.

Like a review of Gentoo's Lord, be sure to say I'm attacking Gentoo, but in fact the commentary does every opportunity to show how much he understands Gentoo and how much he can use it. As for? The way you embody your abilities must be to place others on your opposite side.

I suggest you look at the "Henan people who provoked" this book, which mentions that the deep heart of regional discrimination, in fact, by discriminating against others to improve their status. Like a street man in the United States, running to discriminate against the Chinese, when he speaks, to make discriminatory language, behavior, in fact, the latent heart is to use such opportunities to improve their sense of superiority.

And such a state of mind is ubiquitous in our lives. "I must belittle you!" to reflect my correctness. ”

• This article from: Hobby Linux Technology Network

The server operating system should choose CentOS or Debian/ubuntu