[svlug] Mandrake as production server
james at linuxrebel.us
Fri Dec 24 21:09:11 PST 2004
On Fri, 2004-12-24 at 11:03, linux romeo wrote:
> Hi List,
> I want to know hows Mandrake 10 as a production
> server (webserver) . I use Mandrake and fc2 as dev
> server and in laptop ...Overall I find Mandrake easy
> to setup and maitain (uprmi) ...with fc you can things
> work with bit of tweaking .....Is any body using
> mandrake as production server ??
Not now. But in my last position I used MDK in 3 major areas,
Devloper boxes (they loved being able to use urpmi, so most of them
chose it as their main OS.) Samba File server. (Serving a single large
repository so that people could save and drop and instantly share with
outhers.) Corporate firewall, and as a webserver. I'd done this btw
since MDK 7.2 through 10.0. Basically if MDK or SuSE can do it so can
MDK. Security updates are timely and the ability to use urpmi not only
to update a box as needed (security updates) but the ability to upgrade
from OS to OS version was smooth over the net. (I was able to update
the Samba server while it was in use and except for the reboot to the
new kernel at the end of the work day no one saw even the smallest
"blip") I've found too that unless you need something special for new
Hardware staying 1 release behind tends to give you a much more stable
environment. The first month or two with any MDK release tends to be a
bit hectic as it seems they are cycled just ahead of the releases from
the major packages and of course everyone wants the newest and
coolest.(for example in 10.0 right after the release gnome 2.6 (I think
that is the major/minor) came out.)
No taking from apt-get as it is urpmi's big brother but it is shaping up
to be a real time saver expecially in the parallel mode. And yes, it
can be ported to RH. But it is easier for people to learn to use and
has a nice interface (though I have to admit synaptic is really sweet.)
Nicest part. MDK's minimal install is 64MB. And unlike some Linux
products when you say "Don't install XXX-application" it doesn't get
installed. (Talking about a clean install)
Setting up local urpmi repositories is easy. Drop all of the rpms in a
dir including a signature file and type genhdlist. Now all you need to
do is point boxes at it.
Cooker is no where near as stable as Debians unstable. It's a truly
unstable branch at times.
The CE (community edition) went from the intended idea of setting up as
part of a FreeBSD like release system (Unstable - Release - Stable) and
has become an extened Beta... not cool IMHO
URPMI is no where near as easy to setup on a large number of installs as
apt-get with Debian is. Easier to use but IMHO setting up Debians
apt-get is less hands on per box than URPMI is.
An annoying tendency to fix things that IMHO aren't broken. Sometimes I
feel like yelling "Stop tweaking"
Like any distro the kernel is heavily patched. So it's harder to
compare your running kernels version number accurately to bugtraq etc.
Some of the "volunteer" developers could use lessons in tact and
patience. However the employees of MDK are about as aproachable and
easy to deal with as you could ever want. If you are willing to assist
in solving a problem there are people who will work with you till the
problem is solved. This of course is especially true if you are paying
for the assistance.
More information about the svlug