RH vs Debian vs FreeBSD as a server platform

[TheQuirk]

I am toying with the idea of running a fully-fledged server to host a bunch of websites for free (I got a job, and I could take the plunged for about $170 a month with some shady co-locater). I am just curious, which would FMS recommend: RH, Debian, or FreeBSD for the server OS?

[voidmain]

I have used all three for similar functions and I think they are all fairly equal for doing what you want to do (at least between RH and Debian). Another thing you might want to consider if you want to run any proprietary software it could make a difference. For instance a few years ago I set up RealServer so several of the sites on the host in question could stream RealVideo/Audio. I believe at the time they only supported Linux (and possibly Red Hat specifically if memory serves me correctly) but I never tried getting it to work under FreeBSD. I know they have opened up a lot of their software, maybe things have changed. At any rate that's just one example.

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: void main ]

[Master of Reality]

Slacwkare. I prefer it for my server than redhat.
And if you go with a BSD i suggest OpenBSD.

MES is running on FreeBSD though.

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: The Master of Reality / Bob ]

[TheQuirk]

Those are my only choices because they're popular among hosts and because CPanel runs on them. (http://cpanel.net/realindex.html?from=http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com/).

[edustind]

I prefer freebsd.  The ports collection on it, makes it very easy to install/upgrade software.

[TheQuirk]

I decided to go with FreeBSD. Because, you know.

Well, I don't know. I just want to toy around with it. I was also told FreeBSD and something like IPTables called "ipf" or "ipfw" and that it was "both much less confusing than iptables" and that I'll "never want to use lunix again after freebsd". It was in #freebsd, so they might be a _little_ biased   . Anyone know anything about that?

[voidmain]

I figured it came from a BSD forum. I use both, I like both. I do have some preference for Linux but  more for political reasons than technical. I have found it's much easier to get Linux into corporations because all the big guys are starting to embrace it.

And I prefer the GPL license for most of the applications because I hate people that steal code, turn it into a proprietary product and don't give anything back. Microsoft is one of many examples of that. They took BSD's TCP/IP stack/utilities, bastardized it and then don't release any information about it so other products can not interoperate with them. This really isn't possible with GNU systems.

[ January 11, 2003: Message edited by: void main ]

[TheQuirk]

I'll see how it goes.

[choasforages]

but we know how much of a shit microsoft gives about stealing anything, so if linux's tcp/ip stack beat bsd's, im sure it would have "found" its way into windows

[ January 12, 2003: Message edited by: chaosforages ]

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by chaosforages:
but we know how much of a shit microsoft gives about stealing anything, so if linux's tcp/ip stack beat bsd's, im sure it would have "found" its way into windows

I would never make the claim that Linux' TCP/IP stack beats BSD because that would be a stupid claim. The BSD TCP/IP stack is well known as the best. Although the Linux TCP/IP implementation has gotten much much better than it once was it still isn't the best.

[TheQuirk]

Pardon me, but, wasn't the tcp/ip stack originally developed for and by the guy that originally wrote BSD? (What was his name? Bill? It started with a "B")...

[5amYan]

Here I am pointin to this again

Now I would like to point out the right most column.  What about those companies isn't BIG.  In fact they are mostly comanies that provide the internet it's internettedness.

Oh FreeBSD would be my answer.

[ February 17, 2003: Message edited by: 5amYan ]