I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before.
We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced
overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same
vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny?

I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/09/08 11:30, Tenant wrote:
> I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before.
> We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced overview
> of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same vein are
> there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny?
>
> I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.

A web server needs stability. Go with Etch and the most modern
kernel in Etch.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

We want... a Shrubbery!!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIJIqZS9HxQb37XmcRAtsfAJ4qt2vFEM83UKtdHd5QbS Aft5jhzwCgtejR
g2DUr4r8nJFrLowVwPukgIQ=
=4RjN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Fri May 9 2008 09:30:43 Tenant wrote:
> I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before.
> We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced
> overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same
> vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with
> Lenny?
>
> I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.

If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software
versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality
and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those
on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and
often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare
and they are usually sadly out of date.

In recent years we have used only Debian Stable on servers.

Otherwise you can choose between Debian Testing, Debian Unstable,
Debian Stable+Backports, a mixture of the above, or Ubuntu Stable.
(I wouldn't recommend pre-release versions of Ubuntu for anything
except beta testing.) Generally these Debian versions involve more
work due to the large volume of updates. Ubuntu Stable on the
other hand has something of a history of nasty update problems,
and the support on ubuntu-users is not the same quality as on
debian-users. Ubuntu is quirky but usually supports a wider range
of hardware than Debian. Ubuntu installation is easier than
Debian providing the way you want to configure your system matches
the way that Ubuntu wants to configure your system.

In recent years we used Ubuntu on workstations, then switched to
a mix of Debian Testing and Debian Unstable. We're just starting
on yet another re-evaluation against Debian Stable+Backports and
Ubuntu. For workstations there are many acceptable solutions but
no great solutions as yet.

--Mike Bird


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

2008/5/9 Mike Bird <mgb-debian@yosemite.net>:
> If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software
> versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality
> and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those
> on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and
> often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare
> and they are usually sadly out of date.
>

This is very, very true. Especially the part about the mailing lists.
I joined the Debian list because the Ubuntu list was so childish. That
naturally got me to installing Debian. I still install Ubuntu for new
Linux users, though.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
×�-ב-×’-ד-×”-ו-×–-×—-ט-×™-ך-×›-ל-×�-מ-ן-×-ס-×¢-×£-פ-×¥-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

On Fri, May 9, 2008 9:30 am, Tenant wrote:
> We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced
> overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same
> vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny?

For Colo work I wouldn't recommend Ubuntu. Ubuntu's track record for
upgrades between releases is spotty. Most times the recommended
procedure is a reinstall. While that is tolerable (note, not ideal) for
workstations thanks to Microsoft's training of the IT world it is
utterly unacceptable for servers. That goes double for servers you most
likely have no physical access to.

Debian's release schedule is glacial, granted, but a part of that is the
effort that goes into ensuring that upgrading from one release to the
next won't break in unexpected ways. Some things will break in upgrades
because of version incompatibilities on specific applications, but
generally the whole system won't go belly up because of an upgrade.

Because of that proven track record of dedication to smooth upgrades
going back 10 years I would not recommend anything but Debian for colo
machines. It is all that I have used on my colo machines in spite of my
love/hate relationship with Debian on the desktop and subsequent
dabbling with Ubuntu on the desktop.

--
Steve Lamb


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Mike Bird wrote:
> On Fri May 9 2008 09:30:43 Tenant wrote:
>> I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before.
>> We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
>> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
>> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced
>> overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same
>> vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with
>> Lenny?
>>
>> I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.
>
> If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software
> versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality
> and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those
> on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and
> often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare

Yes, I quite agree that Debian's mailing lists are very useful, full of
knowledgeable people and quite good at giving accurate as compared
to Ubuntu lists.

In my experience, Ubuntu turns out to be more "friendly" and "gui rich"
in workstations though --- as perceived by an average user.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Tenant wrote:

> I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before.
> We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running
> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced
> overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same
> vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with
> Lenny?
>
> I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.

I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes releases
less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and update my
machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. If all the
hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my suggestion is
Debian Etch.

I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to constantly
keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes etc., With
stable you only need to keep track of security updates and the updates work
99.99 % of the time.

hth
raju
--
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/
http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Tenant wrote:
> I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. We're
> looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running Debian
> Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at Ubuntu, which
> is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced overview of the pros and
> cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same vein are there any views on
> just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny?
>
> I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks.

If your server still runs sarge that is good and bad.

It is good because etch will seem like space age technology to you,
though it's already one year since release.

It is bad because you waited so long with an upgrade. The security
support for sarge has ended.

I would suggest about the same time as lenny is released you start
planning you next upgrade. This way you will have an entire year to
complete the move (security support for oldstable ends about one year
after the release of stable).

Regards,
Andrei
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIJV2OqJyztHCFm9kRAgmGAJ4xOTPDSvLS/6fP6Y8iKtERJ8200ACdGXgi
Bg9AR7xNvGRPIlKMN6ZDbqk=
=2exz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Tenant wrote:

> Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at
> Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced

Disclaimer: I'm a Debian user, not an Unbuntoid (or whatever they call
themselves). While there's an Ubuntu Server Edition, the things to think
about are:

- Ubuntu's claim to fame is its focus on the desktop and 6-month
release cycles. Neither is really a good idea for server-centric
stuff.

- Ubuntu applications are essentially a subset of what's available
in sid at whatever point in time they take their snapshot.

That said, the Ubuntu folks often have fixes for things that have been
languishing on the Debian bug tracker for a gazillion years, and you can
always buy support from Canonical.

That said, my personal opinion is that you should run commercial servers
on Debian stable, with the (very) occasional must-have package imported
from sid. Unless you need the commercial support, the stability of Etch
is probably your best bet. And, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, why use
it unless it's for the commercial support?

In the end, though, a distro is a distro. Some make it easier to do
certain things than others "out of the box," and some of the commercial
distros have non-free software that makes life (theoretically) simpler
in the short term, but with few exceptions you can make any distro do
anything you want if you apt/yum/compile enough.

YMMV. A lot.

--
"Oh, look: rocks!"
-- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks"


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On 12/05/2008, Todd A. Jacobs <nospam@codegnome.org> wrote:
> That said, my personal opinion is that you should run commercial servers
> on Debian stable, with the (very) occasional must-have package imported
> from sid. Unless you need the commercial support, the stability of Etch
> is probably your best bet. And, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, why use
> it unless it's for the commercial support?

Uhm.

Debian also has commercial support:

http://www.us.debian.org/consultants/

Unless by "commercial support" you mean something other than "paying
to get with Debian"...

- Jordi G. H.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:50:37PM -0500, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

> Unless by "commercial support" you mean something other than "paying
> to get with Debian"...

"Commercial support" is generally understood to mean a vendor that
supports the product it sells. If you buy a suit, you can take it to a
third-party tailor to fix defects, but that's not the same thing as
receiving support (e.g. exchanges or refunds) from the retailer you
bought it from.

Whether or not one *needs* commercial support from a vendor is an
entirely separate issue. However, it *is* a differentiator between
community distributions and commercial distros, and as such should be
considered if you're trying to choose between the two.

--
"Oh, look: rocks!"
-- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks"


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

On Thursday 15 May 2008 10:54:29 Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote:
> > > I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes
> > > releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and
> > > update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made.
> > > If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my
> > > suggestion is Debian Etch.
> > >
> > > I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to
> > > constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes
> > > etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and
> > > the updates work 99.99 % of the time.
> > >
> > > hth
> > > raju
> >
> > Well if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions,
> > then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3
> > years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version
> > is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months
> > support
> >
> > Regards
> > Stephen
>
> That's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS.

Note that LTS original releases are no better quality than normal releases,
and to be frank (after using since release till yesterday) it is very
unstable and has very bad performance in many places.

They make LTSver.1 LTSver.2 etc... I recommend going with one of those as
your first try of Ubuntu in everyday use. I don't know how they do it, but
their 6 months of bug fixing from Sid seems to result in a less stable
system...


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Francis Earl wrote:
> On Thursday 15 May 2008 10:54:29 Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote:
>>
>>>> I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes
>>>> releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and
>>>> update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made.
>>>> If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my
>>>> suggestion is Debian Etch.
>>>>
>>>> I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to
>>>> constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes
>>>> etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and
>>>> the updates work 99.99 % of the time.
>>>>
>>>> hth
>>>> raju
>>>>
>>> Well if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions,
>>> then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3
>>> years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version
>>> is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months
>>> support
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Stephen
>>>
>> That's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS.
>>
>
> Note that LTS original releases are no better quality than normal releases,
> and to be frank (after using since release till yesterday) it is very
> unstable and has very bad performance in many places.
>
> They make LTSver.1 LTSver.2 etc... I recommend going with one of those as
> your first try of Ubuntu in everyday use. I don't know how they do it, but
> their 6 months of bug fixing from Sid seems to result in a less stable
> system...
>
>
I concur. Had Ubuntu on a server for a friend of mine, and it was the
most unstable server I manage.
Have since switched to Etch, and I don't have to do a thing for him.


--
John Allen mailto:john.allen@codemountain.net
CodeMountain http://www.codemountain.net

Ubuntu 8.04, kernel 2.6.24-16-generic
up 10 days, 1:30, 21 users, load average: 0.31, 1.00, 0.85


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org