[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Linux OS

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

2/6/2007 4:22:00 PM

Luke Ivers wrote:
> I'm building a Linux VM inside of my Windows box so I can experiment with
> setting up different ruby/rails situations, configuring apache, trying
> out
> nginx, etc.
>
> I know this is usually a heated debate, but does anyone have any good
> suggestions on which release of Linux I should be using?
>
> I've used Ubuntu before, but just as a desktop, not in a server-type
> environment.
>
> Other than that, I really don't have much experience with any Linux
> flavors.
>
> Thanks.
>
It depends on what sort of server you're looking at. As you state,
Ubuntu is a desktop OS, as is Gentoo. That really leaves you with two
practical options, depending mainly on which package management system
you prefer, RPM/Yum or apt.

1. RPM/Yum. There are two sub-options here, Fedora and an RHEL clone
like CentOS 4.4. Fedora is more bleeding edge, but joined at the hip to
Red Hat. CentOS 4.4 is more stable, but is a pure community effort,
getting only source RPMs from Red Hat. If it matters, a lot more
"professional" servers run with Fedora than with CentOS.

2. Apt. There are a number of Debian-based distros, but I'd recommend
either Sarge (Debian stable) or Etch (Debian testing but in pretty good
shape for servers and "close to stable").

Unless you have strong feelings to the contrary, you'll probably be
better off with a stable Fedora -- I think the latest is Fedora Core 6,
but Fedora Core 5 might be in better shape. I don't personally run any
of the above regularly -- I run Gentoo (mostly workstations) with
occasional shots at CentOS for testing as close to RHEL as I can get
without buying something, or Fedora for things like Planet CCRMA, which
is Fedora Core 5 based. I haven't touched Debian since the Sarge release
-- I loaded it on an ancient laptop and gave the machine away to a
friend of mine for a church project. :)

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blo...

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.
6 Answers

Thomas Hafner

2/10/2007 9:15:00 PM

0

"M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote/schrieb <45C8AB13.9040006@cesmail.net>:

> As you state, Ubuntu is a desktop OS

There's also a server flavour of Ubuntu:
<http://www.ubuntu.com/....

Thomas

Tim X

2/11/2007 4:49:00 AM

0

Thomas Hafner <thomas@hafner.NL.EU.ORG> writes:

> "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote/schrieb <45C8AB13.9040006@cesmail.net>:
>
>> As you state, Ubuntu is a desktop OS
>
> There's also a server flavour of Ubuntu:
> <http://www.ubuntu.com/....
>
> Thomas

I also think that if the OP just want to experiment with a GNU Linux system, in
either a server or desktop configuration, either Ubuntu or Ubuntu server will
do fine. Same goes with Debian or RedHat. Typically, the differences between a
desktop specific distro and a server distro are irrelevant for experimentation
and learning purposes. Most of the server oriented distros only differ fromt he
desktop ones by having less desktop oriented add-ons (often they are included,
but you have to select them manually), with the desktop distros, its the
reverse, most of the key server stuff is there, its just not installed by
default. Some packages may be slightly different, such as being compiled with
options to support a server configuration (i.e. maybe set to use more file
descriptors or with more restrictive but secure options to incrase system
security etc).

If all you really want is a linux box that has a web server, ruby, rails, a
database and associated ruby packages, then any modern desktop distro will be
fine. there is no need to worry about desktop vs server until you decide to get
serious about developing server based apps in ruby and even then, you probably
don't have to be too concerned until you get tot he UAT and production stages.

regards,

Tim

--
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

2/12/2007 3:04:00 PM

0

Luke Ivers wrote:
> The only part that I'm having any real trouble with is customizing the
> kernel before the build. Everything else is pretty much straightforward
> unix/linux stuff that you do on any server to get things done. If anyone
> has references to a guide or something (not the default Gentoo
> installation
> guide) on what to do while configuring the kernel, I'd appreciate the
> help.
For most servers or desktops or workstations, you shouldn't have to
customize the kernel. Read through the manual on using "genkernel". The
exact steps vary from release to release, but essentially all you have
to do is "emerge genkernel" and do a "genkernel all" to get started.
There may be another step to get a default configuration, but unless
you're doing something special like building a router, you shouldn't
have to change the default kernel to get on the air.

Once you get the machine up and running and have done an "emerge
--sync", then you'll want to customize your kernel. But just to get it
booted up, the defaults should work.

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blo...

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.

Luke Ivers

2/13/2007 3:43:00 PM

0

One final followup question:

Someone suggested to me that I look into FreeBSD as an alternative to
the Linux based systems.

Anyone have any experience with FreeBSD that could mention pros/cons?

Thanks.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

Jordan Krushen

2/13/2007 9:17:00 PM

0

On 2/13/07, Luke Ivers <lukeivers@gmail.com> wrote:

> Someone suggested to me that I look into FreeBSD as an alternative to
> the Linux based systems.
>
> Anyone have any experience with FreeBSD that could mention pros/cons?

Pro: It's not Linux.
Con: It's not Linux.

I've been using FreeBSD on servers for over a decade now. It's very solid.

See http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4...
for an excellent ideological comparison of the two.

J.

Dick Davies

2/13/2007 9:19:00 PM

0

On 13/02/07, Luke Ivers <lukeivers@gmail.com> wrote:
> One final followup question:
>
> Someone suggested to me that I look into FreeBSD as an alternative to
> the Linux based systems.
>
> Anyone have any experience with FreeBSD that could mention pros/cons?

Yes, freebsd is great. Well documented ( http://freebsd.or... )
and will run everything you need for rails.

To be honest, just get one and try it. You're asking people what their favourite
OS is and expecting us to reach a consensus. It's not going to happen
before the heat death, so just get stuck in :)


--
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
http://number9.helloope...