Discussions

Which Linux Distribution Version?

+
0 Votes
Locked

Which Linux Distribution Version?

Jaqui
I regularly see people asking for version of software that works with Red Hat Linux 9.

My normal reply: the version on the cdroms for the antiquated version of Red Hat you have. RHL9 is roughly equivalent to using windows 3.1.1, it's not getting security or bugfixes, there is zero support for it.
use a newer version, it will not be as vulnerable to exploits. Red Hat's Fedora Core 6 is coming out soon, it's their latest version.


The funny thing is, webhosting services seem to be using either RHL 7 or RHL 9.

and people wonder why website exploits are so common in the security lists, it's not just to ms based software used to write them, it's the unsupported os under them.
  • +
    0 Votes
    TechExec2

    Web hosting services tend to lag behind because they use distributions packaged by 3rd parties especially for use by web hosting services (example: www.swsoft.com and Plesk). They are integrated with additional software specific to web hosting (remote management, measurement, shared hosting, etc). The integration of new release like Fedora 6 with the additional software takes that 3rd party vendor time to accomplish. Then, the web hosting vendor must buy it and roll it out.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    that doesn't explain why they are using something that has not been supported for 3 years as an os.

    cpanel, used by a lot of webhosts, will run on fedora 6.
    fedora ships with email server, web server, sql servers and php, perl and python support for site scripts.

    quota, designed for shared hosting services, ships with linux.

    they actually have zero excuse for using such old distributions, as all the software they need is available with the distribution they install.
    [ except cpanel frontend for their clients ]

    most webhosting services use scripted tools that work on the latest distros with no issues.

    Their only excuse, they are to lazy to upgrade their servers.

    +
    0 Votes
    stress junkie

    It didn't involve the OS. Rather it involved an application that ran on an unsupported version of Sybase. What a nightmare. It wasn't just a question of upgrading the application. It was that the latest version of the application needed that version of Sybase, or so I was told by the DBA.

    +
    0 Votes
    plrndl

    When you have a proper O/S, you upgrade on a basis of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Breakages in the form of security issues can be back-ported on an open source system, as can drivers for new hardware. Sensible people get a new O/S only when they get new hardware.

    Upgrading of Windoze systems is enabled and encouraged solely for the benefit of M$ cashflow.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    When you have a proper O/S, you upgrade on a basis of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Breakages in the form of security issues can be back-ported on an open source system,
    not always, try backporting a patch for the 2.6 kernel to the 2.2 kernel used in RHL 9
    That is the point, backporting exploit patches is no longer possible.

    as can drivers for new hardware. Sensible people get a new O/S only when they get new hardware.
    True enough, but if you need to write drivers for new hardware, why not get a newer version of the os, it can be gotten FREE of charge, and you get the same level of support as you are getting now.

    Upgrading of Windoze systems is enabled and encouraged solely for the benefit of M$ cashflow.

    can't argue this point.

    +
    0 Votes
    jmgarvin

    RHL 9 was 2.4 RHL 7 was 2.2 ;-)

    However, I can say, in all honesty, bacporting patches SUCKS...I've never seen to work properly 100% of the time and god forbid it's a kernel patch and you have an oldish kernel.

    +
    0 Votes
    ds4211a

    I was definitely mislead by the title of this article. I was looking for a discussion about different distributions of Linux, i.e., Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu, Mandrix, etc. and why the author feels that a particular version is preferable. Oh well, I guess I'll continue using the trial version of Windows Vista. I hardly ever need to use the command prompt to do whatever I want to do on it.

    +
    0 Votes
    kevin.kennedy

    I also thought this would be a discussion of the merits of different linux distributions.
    As a long time windoz user, I find Ubuntu (Dapper Drake 6.06) quite fascinating. I've used both Red Hat and Suse Linux in the past and didn't feel compelled. Ubuntu is different though - I plan this as an eventual replacement for xp pro when ms ends updates in a few more yrs. (No Vista for me - I like building my own machines and retail Vista is TOO expensive.) Wine should allow me to run most of my favorite windoz apps.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    which Distribution would be a title for discussiong the merits of all distros.
    which version is release versions not which distro.

    you like the least secure linux?
    you are nuts.

    RH and Suse are not really ready for enterprise use, they are 95% non compliant with standards, and 100% bloatware.
    but then, all the *buntu options are pure bloatware also.

    no bluetooth devices, yet blutooth support required
    no windows systems at all, yet smbclient required
    desktop system and laptop utils required
    no root account active?
    [ complete insanity ]
    no cli only boot option?
    cannot have a multiboot system with other linux distros, *buntu f*cked up parted and you can't not mount other distros filesystems
    can't install a bootloader over an existing linux bootloader

    I literally had to remove a hard drive from my system just to install UBUNTU 6 and try it out without destroying my existing linux installations.
    they have some serious work to do before they have a usable distribution.

    editing to add:

    un install mozilla's firefox, since I don't like the ui and won't use it, it un installs the entire os. talk about a f*cked dependancy configuration

    +
    0 Votes
    NOW LEFT TR

    not the enire reason why Linux has not taken off in the corp world as hoped?

    So many versions, distributions from multiple vendors.

    I know that this is what makes the essence of Linux but it also stops the CEO types from wandering down the path.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    this is like a corporation still using windows 3.1.1 on 386 machines [ 16 bit processor ] in the day of 64 bit processors.

    I'm questioning the intelligence of a company that is using linux already not upgrading the os long after all support for that version is killed off.

    I have seen ads for linux admins here for RH7, which is utter stupidity on the part of the company to not have upgraded.

  • +
    0 Votes
    TechExec2

    Web hosting services tend to lag behind because they use distributions packaged by 3rd parties especially for use by web hosting services (example: www.swsoft.com and Plesk). They are integrated with additional software specific to web hosting (remote management, measurement, shared hosting, etc). The integration of new release like Fedora 6 with the additional software takes that 3rd party vendor time to accomplish. Then, the web hosting vendor must buy it and roll it out.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    that doesn't explain why they are using something that has not been supported for 3 years as an os.

    cpanel, used by a lot of webhosts, will run on fedora 6.
    fedora ships with email server, web server, sql servers and php, perl and python support for site scripts.

    quota, designed for shared hosting services, ships with linux.

    they actually have zero excuse for using such old distributions, as all the software they need is available with the distribution they install.
    [ except cpanel frontend for their clients ]

    most webhosting services use scripted tools that work on the latest distros with no issues.

    Their only excuse, they are to lazy to upgrade their servers.

    +
    0 Votes
    stress junkie

    It didn't involve the OS. Rather it involved an application that ran on an unsupported version of Sybase. What a nightmare. It wasn't just a question of upgrading the application. It was that the latest version of the application needed that version of Sybase, or so I was told by the DBA.

    +
    0 Votes
    plrndl

    When you have a proper O/S, you upgrade on a basis of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Breakages in the form of security issues can be back-ported on an open source system, as can drivers for new hardware. Sensible people get a new O/S only when they get new hardware.

    Upgrading of Windoze systems is enabled and encouraged solely for the benefit of M$ cashflow.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    When you have a proper O/S, you upgrade on a basis of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Breakages in the form of security issues can be back-ported on an open source system,
    not always, try backporting a patch for the 2.6 kernel to the 2.2 kernel used in RHL 9
    That is the point, backporting exploit patches is no longer possible.

    as can drivers for new hardware. Sensible people get a new O/S only when they get new hardware.
    True enough, but if you need to write drivers for new hardware, why not get a newer version of the os, it can be gotten FREE of charge, and you get the same level of support as you are getting now.

    Upgrading of Windoze systems is enabled and encouraged solely for the benefit of M$ cashflow.

    can't argue this point.

    +
    0 Votes
    jmgarvin

    RHL 9 was 2.4 RHL 7 was 2.2 ;-)

    However, I can say, in all honesty, bacporting patches SUCKS...I've never seen to work properly 100% of the time and god forbid it's a kernel patch and you have an oldish kernel.

    +
    0 Votes
    ds4211a

    I was definitely mislead by the title of this article. I was looking for a discussion about different distributions of Linux, i.e., Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu, Mandrix, etc. and why the author feels that a particular version is preferable. Oh well, I guess I'll continue using the trial version of Windows Vista. I hardly ever need to use the command prompt to do whatever I want to do on it.

    +
    0 Votes
    kevin.kennedy

    I also thought this would be a discussion of the merits of different linux distributions.
    As a long time windoz user, I find Ubuntu (Dapper Drake 6.06) quite fascinating. I've used both Red Hat and Suse Linux in the past and didn't feel compelled. Ubuntu is different though - I plan this as an eventual replacement for xp pro when ms ends updates in a few more yrs. (No Vista for me - I like building my own machines and retail Vista is TOO expensive.) Wine should allow me to run most of my favorite windoz apps.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    which Distribution would be a title for discussiong the merits of all distros.
    which version is release versions not which distro.

    you like the least secure linux?
    you are nuts.

    RH and Suse are not really ready for enterprise use, they are 95% non compliant with standards, and 100% bloatware.
    but then, all the *buntu options are pure bloatware also.

    no bluetooth devices, yet blutooth support required
    no windows systems at all, yet smbclient required
    desktop system and laptop utils required
    no root account active?
    [ complete insanity ]
    no cli only boot option?
    cannot have a multiboot system with other linux distros, *buntu f*cked up parted and you can't not mount other distros filesystems
    can't install a bootloader over an existing linux bootloader

    I literally had to remove a hard drive from my system just to install UBUNTU 6 and try it out without destroying my existing linux installations.
    they have some serious work to do before they have a usable distribution.

    editing to add:

    un install mozilla's firefox, since I don't like the ui and won't use it, it un installs the entire os. talk about a f*cked dependancy configuration

    +
    0 Votes
    NOW LEFT TR

    not the enire reason why Linux has not taken off in the corp world as hoped?

    So many versions, distributions from multiple vendors.

    I know that this is what makes the essence of Linux but it also stops the CEO types from wandering down the path.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    this is like a corporation still using windows 3.1.1 on 386 machines [ 16 bit processor ] in the day of 64 bit processors.

    I'm questioning the intelligence of a company that is using linux already not upgrading the os long after all support for that version is killed off.

    I have seen ads for linux admins here for RH7, which is utter stupidity on the part of the company to not have upgraded.