what do you guys think about centos? asemi, you were using it lately, i thought. good experiences?
i'm looking for a linux distribution to run a multi-core version of stata natively on x86_64. accordingly, i might upgrade my fileserver and migrate from freebsd to linux.
i'm looking for a linux distribution to run a multi-core version of stata natively on x86_64. accordingly, i might upgrade my fileserver and migrate from freebsd to linux.
or maybe this is why god invented AWS EC2. i could just spin-up an instance whenever i have computing to do.
I have no complaints about centos. I have not used any version with systemd, however, and I have a feeling I would hate it if I did (I think 7+ versions have it? but I think 6.whatever should be supported for a good while).
why the file server migration? I have centos VMs for things like openvas and have done virtualization on it with kvm/libvirt, but I probably wouldn't pick it over freebsd for a file server, assuming freebsd has some relatively simple means of doing filesystem encryption and running a stable version of samba.
why the file server migration? I have centos VMs for things like openvas and have done virtualization on it with kvm/libvirt, but I probably wouldn't pick it over freebsd for a file server, assuming freebsd has some relatively simple means of doing filesystem encryption and running a stable version of samba.
There is no version of CentOS with systemd yet ;-) RHEL7 comes with systemd, but CentOS 7 hasn't been released yet. I believe there are some beta's, though.
I've used CentOS a lot, and it's okay, but it's very different from FreeBSD.
CentOS is *very* conservative with updates; basically, the version that comes with the initial release is the version you'll be stuck with for the remainder of the release cycle. Security fixes and other critical bugs will be resolved, though, and support is for 10 years.
This is both a good & bad thing; it's good since it gives you a stable environment which is easy to update & keep secure without too much hand-holding. It's bad because you're always running old software, which can be an annoyance, or may even prevent running some applications which require a newer version of PHP, Python, libfoo, or whatever.
Arch Linux is a more FreeBSD-ish Linux; it comes with systemd (blergh), and the installer sucks (actually, there is no installer, you need to do it manually), but other than that it's pretty nice (been running it as a desktop for the last few months).
I dislike anything Debian.
I've used CentOS a lot, and it's okay, but it's very different from FreeBSD.
CentOS is *very* conservative with updates; basically, the version that comes with the initial release is the version you'll be stuck with for the remainder of the release cycle. Security fixes and other critical bugs will be resolved, though, and support is for 10 years.
This is both a good & bad thing; it's good since it gives you a stable environment which is easy to update & keep secure without too much hand-holding. It's bad because you're always running old software, which can be an annoyance, or may even prevent running some applications which require a newer version of PHP, Python, libfoo, or whatever.
Arch Linux is a more FreeBSD-ish Linux; it comes with systemd (blergh), and the installer sucks (actually, there is no installer, you need to do it manually), but other than that it's pretty nice (been running it as a desktop for the last few months).
I dislike anything Debian.
> why the file server migration?
because stata doesn't support native freebsd... i want to run stata on my server/desktop so i can easily leave it running. i like to put my laptop to sleep often. this way, i can keep my program executing somewhere.
because stata doesn't support native freebsd... i want to run stata on my server/desktop so i can easily leave it running. i like to put my laptop to sleep often. this way, i can keep my program executing somewhere.