General discussion


Converted at last

By Roger99a ·
I have finally been converted, thanks to Ubuntu and Debian, to Linux. I've been a Windows guy for 10 years but could never get the hang of Linux. Redhat was useless and confusing to me. Debian rocks! I'm running Ubuntu from home, no big accomplishment, but what I did at work I think brings me into the Linux world. We needed a "nix box for a project I dreamed up. It needed to be secure and familiar to my database guy who works on FreeBSD systems. The FreeBSD guy at work was unavailable for this project so I decided to build a Debian box. With very little assistance (mostly "What program do you use for" questions) I setup the Debian box, Apache-ssl, OpenSSL, FTP, Mail and it all works. WOOHOO! I think I'll start replacing those BSD boxes soon.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Linux Flavors

by BFilmFan In reply to Converted at last

I am just starting to pick up on Linux myself, as it looks like a nice complimentary skill set to cram into my big ol' AD-infected head. I will have to see if I can scrounge up a copy of that at work. Should have one as we have at least 10 flavors of Linux and Unix the last time I asked about for Redhat.

Collapse -


by Jaqui In reply to Linux Flavors

red hat is the worst in my opinion.
not a bad installer, but the worst ditro.
even thier fdisk is bug ridden.

then, I've had it not be able to mount root partition.
in partition structure it created.

no interest in using it at all.

Collapse -

Linux = Choice

by Choppit In reply to shudder

That's the beauty of Linux, if you don't like a particular distro, there's plenty of others to choose from.

Collapse -

Red Hat

by Roger99a In reply to shudder

I actually built and used a Red Hat server before with Squid. The KDE desktop stayed locked up all the time. Left a bad taste............

Collapse -

KDE and squid server on Red Hat

by apotheon In reply to Red Hat

I don't think I'll ever understand the mindset that requires a huge, bloated GUI on a server.

By the way, I deal with squid servers on Fedora at my datacenter job. Something the devs and I have noticed is that the squids on Fedora Core 3 are less than efficient. They ran much better on FC2 than they do on FC3. We're currently theorizing that it has something to do with the custom kernels that RH installs use, and we're planning a possible simultaneous performance test of FreeBSD and Debian.

If I'm sufficiently subtle, maybe I can get everything moved to Debian. In the meantime, at least I might get to start learning more about FreeBSD.

Collapse -

agree with that

by Jaqui In reply to KDE and squid server on R ...

a server doesn't need a gui at all.
the console tools are more than enough to administer it.
if you want, you can use webmin, from remote workstation.
but I like using ssh for remote if I don't have ready physical access to the server.

Collapse -

same here

by apotheon In reply to agree with that

It's all SSH for remote administration for me. The CLI tools are more powerful and flexible than any GUI tools out there, anyway.

Collapse -


by Roger99a In reply to same here

I agree that a GUI on a server is added overhead, but it may be needed for certain users. I used it on the Squid/Red Hat system because it was a learning tool. I didn't learn much except that GUI's don't belong on Linux servers. The new server I built doesn't have a GUI. I'm using SSH and the Database/Web guy is using Webmin for some stuff he does.

Collapse -

learning tools

by apotheon In reply to same here

"I didn't learn much except that GUI's don't belong on Linux servers."

Hah! That's funny.

Next up: scripting for system administration. You'll probably want to start by learning shell scripting (which is absurdly easy: it's about as easy to learn as batch scripting for DOS, but roughly a thousand times as powerful and flexible). After that, if you're still going, is Perl scripting. There hasn't been an enhancement to system administration capabilities that compares to Perl scripting in power and flexibility.

Because all the system essentials in unix are essentially plain text, and Perl is the text manipulation tool to reckon with, Perl is the ultimate unix system administration toolkit. It has been referred to as the "Swiss Army chainsaw" because it'll basically let you do anything you want to, including (metaphorically) cutting off your own limbs. As a unix sysadmin, you know you've arrived when you find yourself doing everything with Perl scripts without even thinking about it.

Note: Perl is so flexible that it will actually allow you to read data from anywhere on your hard drive into a variable, change it, then write it back where you found it. This means that you could, conceivably, patch your OS kernel in one line of Perl. This would be an insanely impressive thing to do, and a generally insane thing to do as well: it is not an avisable task, but it's cool that the option is there.

In any case, good luck. Have you joined a LUG mailing list yet? It's the best tech support you'll ever find.

Collapse -


by apotheon In reply to shudder

I loathe Anaconda (the installer RH-based Linuxes use). It's bloated and slow, and it installs far too much crap by default, even when you choose a "minimal" install.

Related Discussions

Related Forums