I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look
Ubuntu isn't horrible at all, I just find it bloated, especially if I'm not needing a GUI at all.
Insomnia City BBS SysOp
Kalamazoo, MI USA
bbs.farcasternet.org Telnet 23, SSH 2222
I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look at?
I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look at?
ogg wrote to Mandarax <=-
Ubuntu isn't horrible at all, I just find it bloated, especially if I'm not needing a GUI at all.
Being bloated is why I'm looking. I just need enough to run
Mystic.
I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look at?
Being bloated is why I'm looking. I just need enough to run Mystic.
I use Ubuntu, and in my past life was a Debian acolyte. I just found Debian to be so utterly slow in taking new features (part of its value prop, I think) that I was more suited to the Ubuntu release cycles.
I also liked CentOS in the past but now am not sure what out of that family I'd use...
Ubuntu
Debian
CentOS
All solid IMO.
Ubuntu
Debian
CentOS
Thanks for the help! Since I cut my teeth on linux mint, raspbian and ubuntu, I guess I'm a debian guy. I don't want to have to worry about making the os work along with the bbs, I decided to stick with debian. I'll look into the other suggestions after moving things over.
Thanks for the help! Since I cut my teeth on linux mint, raspbian and ubuntu, I guess I'm a debian guy.
I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look at?
Thanks for the help! Since I cut my teeth on linux mint, raspbian and
ubuntu, I guess I'm a debian guy.
Well those sound like yer an Ubuntu guy - but all the same. :P Glad you found a linux base.
pAULIE42o
I'm looking at switching the bbs back to linux. I had it on Ubuntu but not sure if I want to go back to it. Those of you running Mystic on
Linux, can you give me some help on deciding which distros I should look at?
I use Ubuntu, and in my past life was a Debian acolyte. I just found Debian to be so utterly slow in taking new features (part of its value prop, I think) that I was more suited to the Ubuntu release cycles.
Really, any server distro that tickles yer fancy would be something to consider - I like to land on a distro thats 'current' but not bleeding edge. At one point I wanted to try an Arch server, and IMO thats just a dumb choice - for a bbS platform.
Why is it a dumb choice for a BBS platform? Honestly, I've been running Archlinux here for all of my servers (3 VMs, 2 BBS related and the other
a Plex server) for over a decade now. I've never had to reinstall or format and start over, etc. Arch is actually quite stable for being so current.
I think the best answer is, "any distro that tickles yer fancy".
I don't like to use rolling releases on any of my servers because I
don't want bleeding edge.
Arch is my main machine distro, because I enjoy using and testing the newest packages.
I don't like to use rolling releases on any of my servers because I
don't want bleeding edge.
I think the best answer is, "any distro that tickles yer fancy".
And theres your answer.
I use Arch for my daily computing desktop needs and love it for that purpose, but it does tend to break once in a while and need some extra attention to get things working as expected. Debian and Ubuntu Server in my experience only have things break at major version upgrades, but
that's the expectation (having a major version change requiring some manual intervention). And it's well documented. So that's why I prefer Debian or Ubuntu for my servers.
I use Arch for my daily computing desktop needs and love it for that purpose, but it does tend to break once in a while and need some extra attention to get things working as expected. Debian and Ubuntu Server in my experience only have things break at major version upgrades, but
that's the expectation (having a major version change requiring some manual intervention). And it's well documented. So that's why I prefer Debian or Ubuntu for my servers.
I use Ubuntu, and in my past life was a Debian acolyte. I just found Debian to be so utterly slow in taking new features (part of its valu prop, I think) that I was more suited to the Ubuntu release cycles.
Agreed about Debian. Debian is solid, and stable as all get out, but
even new releases of Debian are so far behind most other distros (even
if you use the bleeding edge version of Debian, whatever it's name is now). As a tinkerer, it bugged me. However if you just want something
that will run with no issues for years on end till the next release
comes out, then it's definitely a good choice. ;)
Regards,
Nick
While arch is a rolling distro, and tends to get new packages pretty
fast, it's still not really "bleeding edge" although it's probably about as close as you're going to get without compiling as soon as said maintainers release. In Arch, the latest and greatest is still tested quite a bit before being allowed into the package management system.
In the world of Linux, where people like to argue about the dumbest
things like which distro is the best and why it's better than Windows, it's really the _only_ answer. When one has the urge to try out Linux, they should take the time and have the patience to try out as many
distros as they possibly can until they find the one they like the best.
If I may ask, what tends to break on you once in awhile? In my
experience, the only issues I've ever had is while upgrading, (and this doesn't happen very often, mind you) PGP keys aren't removed or some
such and you have to install archlinux-keyring manually before
continuing with a normal pacman upgrade.
Otherwise, I have nothing against Debian, especially for a server platform. It just doesn't 'tickle my fancy', lol. I think I've had more issues in the past with Ubuntu than anything else, but that was back
when I still used a GUI and apparantly they phased out my video card at the time which took forever to figure out. By the time I did they were just starting to introduce the "legacy" drivers and any time you ran an upgrade (not even a major one) everything went to shit and had to spend hours fixing it. I'm sure it's a lot better now, but it still leaves a sour taste for me. Had I been using any other distro at the time I probably wouldn't have anything against Ubuntu either. ;)
While I don't fault it, as I enjoy rolling for my main machines, I can't think of any 12 month period where SOMETHING in Arch breaks that needs my intervention.
The last thing was the GRUB issue that left the machine needing a GRUB-mkconfig in order to boot... no biggy, arch-chroot in, run the command and move on - but for me, those issues don't jive with a server machine that needs to be up.
The last thing was the GRUB issue that left the machine needing a GRUB-mkconfig in order to boot... no biggy, arch-chroot in, run the command and move on - but for me, those issues don't jive with a server machine that needs to be up.
The other thing that is good about choosing Debian, is if you run into trouble you've got other Debian users who can help you.
Upstream changes make their way into the pacman repos pretty fast, typically. As an example, 16 days ago there was a systemd update which broke secure boot in a number of BIOSes and was first discovered downstream by Arch users, and it took until six days ago to actually fix.
Having used Arch for desktop purposes for several years on and off, it's my favorite desktop distro, but I definitely feel like I'm as bleeding edge as anyone can be without manually downloading and installing
packages from github at every approved PR.
Agree with you here. One nice thing about linux is also that there are certain "flavors" which really lend themselves well to specific applications; Windows has no such thing. Debian for servers? Gentoo for desktops? Great. Go for it. I do feel like the community has come around quite a bit from the previous stance of distro elitism, but I sense some of it at times still.
In the past year I've dealt with a Grub break, a systemd secure boot break, a GPU driver break, and a systemd-homed break (which caused me to abandon it and just revert to traditional user management). There was
also a btrfs issue when I started setting up the laptop I'm using now which caused me to abandon btrfs. But I have had a ton of
issues...that's not to say I mind it a ton, necessarily, since this is
my personal desktop and I expect this kind of thing, but this certainly isn't something I'd wanna be dealing with on any of my servers.
I never had that issue. Then again, even though it's a rolling release,
I tend to not upgrade for a couple months at a time, so maybe I just got lucky and missed that one by the time I upgraded. ;)
| Sysop: | Gary Ailes |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pittsburgh, PA |
| Users: | 132 |
| Nodes: | 5 (0 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 110:02:42 |
| Calls: | 733 |
| Files: | 2,171 |
| Messages: | 81,487 |