Francis Earl wrote:
I concur. Had Ubuntu on a server for a friend of mine, and it was the most unstable server I manage.On Thursday 15 May 2008 10:54:29 Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote:I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my suggestion is Debian Etch. I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and the updates work 99.99 % of the time. hth rajuWell if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions, then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3 years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months support Regards StephenThat's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS.Note that LTS original releases are no better quality than normal releases, and to be frank (after using since release till yesterday) it is very unstable and has very bad performance in many places.They make LTSver.1 LTSver.2 etc... I recommend going with one of those as your first try of Ubuntu in everyday use. I don't know how they do it, but their 6 months of bug fixing from Sid seems to result in a less stable system...
Have since switched to Etch, and I don't have to do a thing for him. -- John Allen mailto:john.allen@codemountain.net CodeMountain http://www.codemountain.net Ubuntu 8.04, kernel 2.6.24-16-generic up 10 days, 1:30, 21 users, load average: 0.31, 1.00, 0.85