Comments on: Ubuntu In The Data Center And On The Desktop http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/ Linux. GNU. Freedom. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:59:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-beta3-9791 hourly 1 By: Xaco http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-102160 Xaco Sat, 07 Jun 2008 14:09:16 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-102160 @Andy Gross: not true 6.06 can directly be upgraded to 8.04 @Andy Gross: not true 6.06 can directly be upgraded to 8.04

]]> By: Andy Goss http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91445 Andy Goss Sun, 10 Feb 2008 05:12:51 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91445 To upgrade from Dapper Drake to Hardy Heron you will need to go through all intervening non-LTS versions. Your other option is a clean install. If you want an industrial stength desktop that is upgradeable then Debian and CentOS fit the bill. I originally intended to use CentOS 5, but it did not, at that time, include a program that I rely on for my living, so from Dapper I migrated to Debian Etch. Unless you want fancy desktop features I see no point in looking past these two distros. Note that I am not knocking Ubuntu or Fedora, they are doing a great job of popularising Linux, but I would hesitate to use them for anything mission-critical. To upgrade from Dapper Drake to Hardy Heron you will need to go through all intervening non-LTS versions. Your other option is a clean install. If you want an industrial stength desktop that is upgradeable then Debian and CentOS fit the bill.
I originally intended to use CentOS 5, but it did not, at that time, include a program that I rely on for my living, so from Dapper I migrated to Debian Etch.
Unless you want fancy desktop features I see no point in looking past these two distros. Note that I am not knocking Ubuntu or Fedora, they are doing a great job of popularising Linux, but I would hesitate to use them for anything mission-critical.

]]> By: El Cerrajero http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91417 El Cerrajero Sat, 09 Feb 2008 19:24:33 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91417 Ubuntu people are making a great job attracting users to Linux, that's a fact, but after trying every taste of Ubuntu, I'm still feel more comfortable with pure Debian. Ubuntu people are making a great job attracting users to Linux, that’s a fact, but after trying every taste of Ubuntu, I’m still feel more comfortable with pure Debian.

]]> By: Matt Deverish http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91362 Matt Deverish Sat, 09 Feb 2008 05:09:55 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91362 Get Ubuntu to run properly on something like AWS in EC2 and you are assured of its dominance in the physical data center/virtual data center Get Ubuntu to run properly on something like AWS in EC2 and you are assured of its dominance in the physical data center/virtual data center

]]> By: me http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91299 me Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:32:37 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91299 Chuck Ebbert, Jarod Wilson, Anton Arapov work at Red Hat. The post-form removed the @... Chuck Ebbert, Jarod Wilson, Anton Arapov work at Red Hat.
The post-form removed the @…

]]> By: me http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91298 me Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:25:45 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91298 @aaron > Red Hat does not support Fedora, they only sponsor it. You can "sponsor" a distribution only with cash or with a T-shirt. To "support" a distribution you need devlopers, track security issues, etc. Red Hat (and the communauty) support Fedora. There are explicit end of life for Fedora : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL EOF means "no more updates, no more support, don't fill bugzilla, etc". It does not mean the distribution disappear or is "dead". It is not because Debian (the project) does not provide *commercial* support than Debian (the project) does not support Debian (the distribution). An example. Red Hat support for the kernel package of Fedora (and many many other packages) : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=34390 (For Fedora 8) * Wed Feb 06 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-135 * Wed Feb 06 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-134 * Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-133 * Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-132 * Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-131 * Tue Feb 05 2008 Jarod Wilson 2.6.23.14-130 * Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-129 It's support. Yes or no ? The development branche : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=34341 > Also, Red Hat does not support or sponsor CentOS. Right (for Red Hat). But all updates/errata done for RHEL are in CentOS. It's indirect support. All RHEL errata are freely available (src.rpm form): http://mirrors.kernel.org/redhat/redhat/linux/updates/enterprise/ Changelog for the kernel of Centos ------------------- * mer jan 23 2008 Karanbir Singh - Roll in CentOS Brand changes * mer jan 16 2008 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.6.el5] - [fs] corruption by unprivileged user in directories (Vitaly Mayatskikh ) [428796] {CVE-2008-0001} ... * ven déc 21 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.5.el5] ... * mer nov 14 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.4.el5] ... * mer nov 14 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.3.el5] ... ------------------- This is the Red hat support. > My point being that Ubuntu LTS is every bit as solid as RHEL You miss a point. RHEL is about certification (what certification have Ubuntu LTS ?), is about partners, compatibility, etc. > I can run the same distro on my laptop. With RHEL too. I use Fedora (desktop and some non-critical servers) because Fedora is a great distribution (like Ubuntu, Mandriva, ...), it's free ($0 and freedom), and give me the right support (some bugfix, security updates, etc). It is not a great support, but it's enough. And it's free (is it a problem ?). Which support did you pay form Canonical? Support can be free of change or changed. @aaron
> Red Hat does not support Fedora, they only sponsor it.

You can “sponsor” a distribution only with cash or with a T-shirt.
To “support” a distribution you need devlopers, track security issues, etc.
Red Hat (and the communauty) support Fedora. There are explicit end of life for Fedora :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL
EOF means “no more updates, no more support, don’t fill bugzilla, etc”. It does not mean the distribution disappear or is “dead”.

It is not because Debian (the project) does not provide *commercial* support than Debian (the project) does not support Debian (the distribution).

An example. Red Hat support for the kernel package of Fedora (and many many other packages) :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=34390 (For Fedora 8)
* Wed Feb 06 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-135
* Wed Feb 06 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-134
* Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-133
* Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-132
* Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-131
* Tue Feb 05 2008 Jarod Wilson 2.6.23.14-130
* Tue Feb 05 2008 Chuck Ebbert 2.6.23.14-129

It’s support. Yes or no ?

The development branche :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=34341

> Also, Red Hat does not support or sponsor CentOS.

Right (for Red Hat). But all updates/errata done for RHEL are in CentOS. It’s indirect support.
All RHEL errata are freely available (src.rpm form):
http://mirrors.kernel.org/redhat/redhat/linux/updates/enterprise/

Changelog for the kernel of Centos
——————-
* mer jan 23 2008 Karanbir Singh
- Roll in CentOS Brand changes

* mer jan 16 2008 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.6.el5]
- [fs] corruption by unprivileged user in directories (Vitaly Mayatskikh ) [428796] {CVE-2008-0001}
…
* ven déc 21 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.5.el5]
…
* mer nov 14 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.4.el5]
…
* mer nov 14 2007 Anton Arapov [2.6.18-53.1.3.el5]
…
——————-

This is the Red hat support.

> My point being that Ubuntu LTS is every bit as solid as RHEL

You miss a point.
RHEL is about certification (what certification have Ubuntu LTS ?), is about partners, compatibility, etc.

> I can run the same distro on my laptop.

With RHEL too.

I use Fedora (desktop and some non-critical servers) because Fedora is a great distribution (like Ubuntu, Mandriva, …), it’s free ($0 and freedom), and give me the right support (some bugfix, security updates, etc). It is not a great support, but it’s enough. And it’s free (is it a problem ?).

Which support did you pay form Canonical?
Support can be free of change or changed.

]]> By: Aaron http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91295 Aaron Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:51:59 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91295 @Terry- There are some attractive packages that are missing from Ubuntu, no doubt. However, many of which are very proprietary, even including a lot of tools from Red Hat and Novell when you purchase a support contract. I would like to see more administrative tools, however, make it into Debian and Ubuntu to make it more attractive for the corporate sector. @Terry- There are some attractive packages that are missing from Ubuntu, no doubt. However, many of which are very proprietary, even including a lot of tools from Red Hat and Novell when you purchase a support contract. I would like to see more administrative tools, however, make it into Debian and Ubuntu to make it more attractive for the corporate sector.

]]> By: Terry http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91294 Terry Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:46:59 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91294 I would like to see Ubuntu have the OpenPegasus system as a package that you can install just like RHEL-4 (its called tog-pegasus or something similiar). Having a way for an enterprise administrator to be able to monitor and control the machines will be something that will make Ubuntu attractive to enterprises. You could even have HP OpenView connect to the pegasus repository and manage it. I'm sure it would make it more attractive to enterprises. I would like to see Ubuntu have the OpenPegasus system as a package that you can install just like RHEL-4 (its called tog-pegasus or something similiar). Having a way for an enterprise administrator to be able to monitor and control the machines will be something that will make Ubuntu attractive to enterprises. You could even have HP OpenView connect to the pegasus repository and manage it. I’m sure it would make it more attractive to enterprises.

]]> By: Aaron http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91292 Aaron Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:28:44 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91292 @Igor- Yes. SLED is the enterprise desktop versus the enterprise server that I was outlining in my post. Both of which are "enterprise" versions of OpenSUSE. @Nathan- This was outlined in the post: "Better get Red Hat Enterprise Linux.", which is also known as RHEL. @me- Red Hat does <b>not</b> support Fedora, they only sponsor it. You will no formal support for Fedora from Red Hat. "Commercial support" = support. It's the same thing. Also, Red Hat does not support or sponsor CentOS. Finally, you outlined the point of my post perfectly. You need to rely on two distributions. One for community/bleeding edge, and another for "commercial support". And of course I can compare RHEL to Ubuntu LTS. My point being that Ubuntu LTS is every bit as solid as RHEL, yet it comes from one company, namely Canonical, and I can run the same distro on my laptop. @tale- Red Hat does have the Advanced Workstations which are part of the RHEL releases. SUSE has the same with their SLED version. @Igor- Yes. SLED is the enterprise desktop versus the enterprise server that I was outlining in my post. Both of which are “enterprise” versions of OpenSUSE.

@Nathan- This was outlined in the post: “Better get Red Hat Enterprise Linux.”, which is also known as RHEL.

@me- Red Hat does not support Fedora, they only sponsor it. You will no formal support for Fedora from Red Hat. “Commercial support” = support. It’s the same thing. Also, Red Hat does not support or sponsor CentOS. Finally, you outlined the point of my post perfectly. You need to rely on two distributions. One for community/bleeding edge, and another for “commercial support”. And of course I can compare RHEL to Ubuntu LTS. My point being that Ubuntu LTS is every bit as solid as RHEL, yet it comes from one company, namely Canonical, and I can run the same distro on my laptop.

@tale- Red Hat does have the Advanced Workstations which are part of the RHEL releases. SUSE has the same with their SLED version.

]]> By: tale http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91289 tale Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:20:48 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91289 I think Ubuntu is the better distro, but I'd like to point out that Red Hat does have versions of their enterprise distro that is designed for workstations. I'm not sure about Suse I think Ubuntu is the better distro, but I’d like to point out that Red Hat does have versions of their enterprise distro that is designed for workstations. I’m not sure about Suse

]]> By: me http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91288 me Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:18:32 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91288 > I find this rather unfortunate, as neither Fedora nor OpenSUSE are officially supported by Red Hat or Novell respectively. Red Hat support Fedora. Red Hat does not provide *commercial* support. > You must purchase their enterprise offerings for support. For commercial support. > The server powering this blog, and many other sites and services, is running the first LTS release, Ubuntu 6.06.2, codenamed Dapper Drake. A lot of Fedora contributors use CentOS (7 years support like RHEL). Btw : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL > This makes it easy for me to only have to learn one distribution. It makes it easy to migrate packages, config files and maintain binary compatibility. RH9 => RHEL 3 FC3 => RHEL 4 FC6 => RHEL 5 F10 => RHEL 6 ? RHEL (or CentOS) is the "LTS" of Fedora. Well, the thuth is "RHEL is not only the "LTS" of Fedora !". You can't compare RHEL with Ubuntu LTS. http://www.redhat.com/magazine/019may06/features/fedora_rhel_1/index.html http://www.redhat.com/magazine/020jun06/features/fedora_rhel_2/index.html http://www.redhat.com/magazine/021jul06/features/fedora_rhel_3/ http://www.redhat.com/magazine/022aug06/features/fedora_rhel_4/ > I find this rather unfortunate, as neither Fedora nor OpenSUSE are officially supported by Red Hat or Novell respectively.

Red Hat support Fedora. Red Hat does not provide *commercial* support.

> You must purchase their enterprise offerings for support.

For commercial support.

> The server powering this blog, and many other sites and services, is running the first LTS release, Ubuntu 6.06.2, codenamed Dapper Drake.

A lot of Fedora contributors use CentOS (7 years support like RHEL).
Btw :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL

> This makes it easy for me to only have to learn one distribution. It makes it easy to migrate packages, config files and maintain binary compatibility.

RH9 => RHEL 3
FC3 => RHEL 4
FC6 => RHEL 5
F10 => RHEL 6 ?

RHEL (or CentOS) is the “LTS” of Fedora. Well, the thuth is “RHEL is not only the “LTS” of Fedora !”.

You can’t compare RHEL with Ubuntu LTS.

http://www.redhat.com/magazine/019may06/features/fedora_rhel_1/index.html
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/020jun06/features/fedora_rhel_2/index.html
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/021jul06/features/fedora_rhel_3/
http://www.redhat.com/magazine/022aug06/features/fedora_rhel_4/

]]> By: Nathan http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91286 Nathan Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:18:01 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91286 Redhat also has an enterprise version of RHEL 5. Redhat also has an enterprise version of RHEL 5.

]]> By: Igor http://pthree.org/2008/02/08/ubuntu-in-the-data-center-and-on-the-desktop/#comment-91284 Igor Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:12:22 +0000 http://pthree.org/?p=549#comment-91284 Also Novell have a enterprise(y also hate this word, its the silliest concept in computer world) desktop solution called SLED. But you're right, Canonical is better because it also support "community versions" Also Novell have a enterprise(y also hate this word, its the silliest concept in computer world) desktop solution called SLED.

But you’re right, Canonical is better because it also support “community versions”

]]>