Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource) [LWN.net]

SearchOpenSource.com interviews Benjamin Mako Hill. "Ubuntu has always been a perfectly good server OS. Part of the problem though is that historically Debian has been really good for servers, and Ubuntu was really good for the desktop. People assumed that because there was so much effort given to the desktop by Ubuntu developers, then the server side would not work at all. But the truth is we [at Ubuntu] have been running the OS on our servers ever since the Warty Warthog release.3wThe success of the desktop distribution really distracted people from that good effort on the server side."

to post comments

Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource)

Posted Aug 3, 2006 23:52 UTC (Thu) by dcreemer (guest, #5103) [Link] (1 responses)

At my company, we have found it valuable to run Ubuntu on the desktop for development and on
our servers for production deployment. So in that sense, the desktop OS and the server OS
compliment each other nicely.

agreed! this is very useful

Posted Aug 4, 2006 16:48 UTC (Fri) by b7j0c (guest, #27559) [Link]

being able to replicate your server environment on your desktop (sharing packages, etc) is a huge boon for developers. the added benefit with a system like ubuntu (and many other linux and bsd variants) is that it also provides a seamless environment across hardware platforms. i run ubuntu on my powerbook g4 at work and my PC at home. that i can have an identical interface to two different hardware platforms is a huge gain.

Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource)

Posted Aug 4, 2006 8:09 UTC (Fri) by frankie (subscriber, #13593) [Link] (4 responses)

I'm surely biased, but ubuntu server edition is nothing much different from debian with a good choice of packages after basic installation. Its only plus eventually is a more up-to-date kernel, which is useful in some situations (but can be done also by smart user with custom kernels for d-installer).

Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource)

Posted Aug 4, 2006 8:38 UTC (Fri) by nedrichards (subscriber, #23295) [Link] (3 responses)

the other difference would be that with dapper you have 5 years of guaranteed support. that's important for some people.

Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource)

Posted Aug 4, 2006 11:36 UTC (Fri) by jeroen (guest, #12372) [Link] (2 responses)

But that's only for packages that are in Ubuntu itself and not in universe. The packages in universe are basically the packages which were in sid on a given moment (and could be horribly broken, because sid is somethings horribly broken) and don't have any support.

I rather have 2.5 years support on all packages I've installed than 5 years on just a part of the packages I've installed. And when Debian stops its support, I've had a year the time to upgrade all my machines anyway.

Linux expert sees expanded role for Ubuntu on the server (SearchOpenSource)

Posted Aug 4, 2006 13:11 UTC (Fri) by jbailey (guest, #16890) [Link] (1 responses)

I'm curious how many packages from universe you find yourself installing on your servers? AFAIK, the folks who've chosen the packages for main went through a bit of effort to try and make sure that most servers would generally have what they need covered.

Server packages not in main

Posted Aug 4, 2006 18:27 UTC (Fri) by TRS-80 (guest, #1804) [Link]

Let's see ...

munin-node, rrdtool (no monitoring for you)
lib{pam,nss}-ldap (want distributed authentication? don't worry, nis is in main)
openvpn (that's ok, just run pptpd, it works with windows more easily, and is only more insecure)
cyrus21 and associated packages (no high-perfomance imap/pop email store for you), squirrelmail (horde and IMP aren't bloaty)
hylafax-client (ok so not many people will need this)
amanda, bacula (backups? who needs backups?), nut (our power never goes down)