Debian7

[viking60]

Ok So I have installed Centos and made it work - so now it is time to check out the arch rival in the server market Debian. I downloaded the 64bit netinstall and started it. I chose the normal install not the GUI install and set it up I was also offered to pick the groups of software I wanted. So I picked webserver SQL SSH server ..and some other stuff. I picked the whole disk for partitioning and put all on the same partition. entered root password and my user and user password. Installed grub. And Debian nicely handled it. So the installation went fine - I think - Time to reboot.... Ah so far so good - I can't wait to se what's behind this: And after waiting with great hopes this is what turned up: Why does everybody insist on that ultra stupid Gnome3 stuff? Well I was offered to log out and there I could pick gnome classic and log back inn again... Oh yes that is better -Gnome clasic. (and gnome 3 will probably work after I have checked my VB settings - but it is still stupid) So I shut down and checked my settings and started again. This time Gnome3 fired without problems.

So I wondered if my server was up and running so I started the browser and checked "localhost" - and got the nice IT Works ! message. The server is placed in /var/www So far so good. So I try to install Mysql in synaptic and every time I hit enter it simply disappears without installing anything Ok there is this other install software program so I picked mysql-server there. And this one also started a config process where I had to set the mysql root password. This is very good because many confuse the Mysql root with the Linux root and end up....confused. Not so with Debian. But again that process stopped leaving me wondering if all had gone through - not good. To check the Mysql database I did a: Code: Select all mysql_secure_installation And sure enough here I discovered that the prompted password was registered, so all is good then. Going for phpmyadmin... I needed to add myself to the sudoers first - so I did that.... And then I did a Code: Select all sudo apt-get install phpmyadmin Well I was a bit tired of those GUI fubars by now... Again I was propted about the setup and what server I would like to set it up with and the mysql connection data - the works! This is good stuff! Debian is good at this - in Centos we would have to know howto or figure it out. Debian is leading us there in a good way. So I fired up the browser and checked out if phpmyadmin was running: Wow impressive and fast! Almost a no brainer.

At this point I would like to add that I am clicking myself to death in that Gnome environment; it may look good but it is highly inefficient

In any case I have a successful install and a working lamp server with phpmyadmin by now.

[viking60]

Using it:

I wanted to move the server from /var/www to ~/public_html so I edited /etc/apache2/sites-available/default and replaced it with /home/viking/public_html Code: Select all <VirtualHost *:80>         ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost         DocumentRoot /home/viking/public_html         <Directory />                 Options FollowSymLinks                 AllowOverride None         </Directory>         <Directory /home/viking/public_html>                 Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews                 AllowOverride None                 Order allow,deny                 allow from all         </Directory> I restarted the apache server with Code: Select all sudo /etc/init.d/apache2 restart I checked it in the browser and it looked good but did not find any pages to show so i made file called info.php with this content /home/viking/public_html/info.php Code: Select all <?php phpinfo(); ?> and behold: Then I checked if phpmyadmin played along with this - and it did! No problem. Time to make this server accessible to the outside world then so I shut it down and added a network setting in VirtualBox for Bridged adapter in addition to the default NAT that I already had. I checked the ip address given by the router with: Code: Select all ip addr and walked to another computer and entered Code: Select all http://10.0.0.99/info.php and sure enough the page turned up.

Now I could ssh into the server and transfer my CMS scripts (php) and import the database with phpmyadmin. No problem! As far as setting up the lamp server this has been a fairly smooth experience. Adding Webmin did work too. I added the webmin repo to /etc/apt/sources.list Code: Select all #webmin repo deb http://download.webmin.com/download/repository sarge contrib And got me the signature key Code: Select all wget http://www.webmin.com/jcameron-key.asc Then I did a Code: Select all sudo aptitude update and a Code: Select all sudo aptitude upgrade and finally Code: Select all sudo aptitude install webmin This setup was easier than the one with Centos 6.5 Time to get rid of Gnome now - (I cannot believe I was a fan of Gnome once).

[viking60]

First I need to say that synaptic is the worst GUI package manager I have worked with. It constantly crashes when I try to install something. It can be used to find software but the installation bit is hopeless. (synaptic:18070): Pango-WARNING **: Invalid UTF-8 string passed to pango_layout_set_text() Segmentation fault The bug is reported but it is three years old I don't know if it is Debian or Synaptic but it does not work. gpk-application works so I use that. I decided to install openbox and all the files needed are in that famous Debian repository I set it up as describes elsewhere in this forum but I noticed that tint2conf let me alter the settings. but I was not allowed to save it. Maybe some security policy but that will not stop a berserk so I edited ~/.config/tint2/tint2rc manually. Logged out and loged back in et voila:

I installed packagesearch to get a decent package search and that turned out to be way better than synaptic. It finds orphans etc and I can remove or install directly in it. Inxi was not in the repos so I had to download the deb files and install them with: Code: Select all sudo dpkg -i inxi_1.9.17-1_all.deb This warned me that gawk was not installed and that inxi needed it so I installed it and after that inxi was installed . Code: Select all inxi -v7 -z System:    Host: debianvb Kernel: 3.2.0-4-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit, gcc: 4.6.3)            Desktop: Openbox 3.5.0 dm: gdm3 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 7 Machine:   System: innotek product: VirtualBox version: 1.2 Chassis: Oracle type: 1            Mobo: Oracle model: VirtualBox version: 1.2 Bios: innotek version: VirtualBox date: 12/01/2006 CPU:       Dual core Intel Core i7 CPU 920 (-MCP-) cache: 6144 KB flags: (lm nx sse sse2 sse3 ssse3) bmips: 10690            Clock Speeds: 1: 2672.503 MHz 2: 2672.503 MHz Graphics:  Card: InnoTek Systemberatung VirtualBox Graphics Adapter bus-ID: 00:02.0 chip-ID: 80ee:beef            X.Org: 1.12.4 drivers: ati,vboxvideo (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) Resolution: [email protected]            GLX Renderer: Chromium GLX Version: 2.1 Chromium 1.9 Direct Rendering: Yes Audio:     Card: Intel 82801FB/FBM/FR/FW/FRW (ICH6 Family) High Definition Audio Controller            driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:05.0 chip-ID: 8086:2668            Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture ver: 1.0.24 Network:   Card-1: Intel 82540EM Gigabit Ethernet Controller            driver: e1000 ver: 7.3.21-k8-NAPI port: d010 bus-ID: 00:03.0 chip-ID: 8086:100e            IF: eth1 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter>            Card-2: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] 79c970 [PCnet32 LANCE]            driver: pcnet32 port: d040 bus-ID: 00:08.0 chip-ID: 1022:2000            IF: eth0 state: unknown speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter>            WAN IP: <filter> IF: eth0 ip: <filter> ip-v6: <filter> IF: eth1 ip: <filter> ip-v6: <filter> Drives:    HDD Total Size: 13.0GB (-)            1: id: /dev/sda model: VBOX_HARDDISK size: 13.0GB serial: VB322d6977-406e3095            Optical: /dev/sr0 model: VBOX CD-ROM rev: 1.0 dev-links: cdrom,dvd            Features: speed: 32x multisession: yes audio: yes dvd: yes rw: none state: running Partition: ID: / size: 12G used: 4.8G (45%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1            label: N/A uuid: 677c2f75-0df7-4d07-861a-c3b8ba2c3958            ID: /media/sf_public_html size: 393G used: 335G (86%) fs: vboxsf dev: /dev/none label: N/A uuid: N/A            ID: swap-1 size: 0.58GB used: 0.02GB (4%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda5            label: N/A uuid: eee5b6f5-dd84-469e-a1d8-94502e9ae5c5 RAID:      No RAID data available - /proc/mdstat is missing - is md_mod kernel module loaded? Unmounted: No unmounted partitions detected Sensors:   None detected - is lm-sensors installed and configured? Info:      Processes: 139 Uptime: 1:30 Memory: 520.1/1002.8MB Runlevel: 2 Gcc sys: 4.7.2 alt: 4.6            Client: Shell (bash 4.2.37 running in gnome-terminal) inxi: 1.9.17 Ok this thing is fairly functional by now. Language wise aka translation wise this is the worst distro I have ever tested. Ubuntu might have been as bad but those two are at the bottom by a mile. It is an unholy mix of English, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian nb and Norwegian nn. This is what Debian calls "Norwegian" and it is an embarrasement. Function wise it does not matter, because we understand it - but I bet most people prefer english oder Deutsch ou Francais over this crapola. Synaptic mangages to have 4 languages. GUI packagemanagement is not state of the art either and beaten by Centos Yumex. Debian 7 comes with Gnome 3 shell. Thats bad.

I am feeling a conclusion coming up.....

[viking60]

Debian is easy to install and gets you up and running faster than Centos. It has a lot of prompting so that you cannot step all to wrong (wich you can in Centos).
And from the install it presents a running server Gnome looks good, but is certainly not my cup of tea - and replacing it with Openbox was pretty painless.
I was surprised at the GUI package management since synaptic did not work so I had to find replacements. Debian uses Aptitude as the default CLI package manager (not apt-get) and that works well.
If you ask me I prefer Yum - it is shorter and therefor faster Also Aptitude needs two steps to update compared to Yums one.
Everything installed in Centos 6.5 works, that is not the case in Debian 7.

Debian 7 is in space because of its reputation of being reliable.

...and it also makes a good desktop. here is a video:

So who is the best?

wait for it.......

wait for it....

Centos is the better server and equally good as desktop. Debian has to many bugs. I tried registering at Debian but I my ip was blocked as a spammer registered by http://www.sorbs.net/ appearantly for spam in 2011???!!! Well there is one thing I hate and that is spammers, so I tried to register there to show them the light - but the confirmation e-mail never arrived.
So the data have been entered only for the NSA to collect then..

I guess the word I am looking for is......quality. Centos6.5 has more of it - that is how it feels.

There is no chance of checking with Debian how this can be fixed - It is an error and the bug is also reported, so an important part of Debian base system is buggy.
I registered without a problem with Centos - but I had no questions - since it all works
Edit:
After having rebooted a few times Synaptic did behave as intended. So I guess we are down to personal preferences again. Chose the one you are comfortable with.

[Snorkasaurus]

Hey viking60,

I have used Synaptic before and never seen it crash, but admit that I have long since left it behind in favour of plain old apt-get command line installs. I also like to wait while everyone else cleans the bugs out of new releases but I have a router running Wheezy (Debian 7) instead of Squeeze (Debian 6) and am quite happy with it. Runs slick in a VM too!

PS: there are some "desktop=xxxx" options you can use at the beginning of the installation if you want a desktop environment but don't like Gnome (personally I'm an Xfce fan).

S.

[viking60]

Yes after a few reboots synaptic has behaved well. So I guess that part is good now (I don't know what it was). I use CLI and aptitude mostly anyway.
The only thing left is that horrible translation. I have not found anything worse so far.

[Snorkasaurus]

Yes after a few reboots synaptic has behaved well. So I guess that part is good now (I don't know what it was).

My best guess would be that your repositories were not updated, but if you just did an install that shouldn't be the case (since the installer runs an apt-get update for you anyways).

S.

[viking60]

Yes I am willing to write it off as "one of those things". In earlier "who can get my server up and running the fastest and easiest way" tests (the lazy method) I preferred Debian over Centos.

It was that impatient Berserk approach where everything just must work and be fast. If I got stuck at some point I simply tried the next distro.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1597

So it comes down to preferences. Debian has been the most popular server in the world viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2522 but mostly Centos wins that "Contest".

I find practical details like apt-get and aptitude being longer than yum, and two versus one operation to update your system to be better in Centos.
The Debian way of differentiating between update and upgrade is somewhat un-logical. Other distros call both of them update.
To upgrade the distro Debian calls it dist-upgrade. All the others call it upgrade.

So there is this love for slightly longer words and more operations that won me over to Centos this time. And I have never been a part of the synaptic congregation - so yumex easily wins the GUI contest.

That is where the rest of the world would probably disagree with me though - there must be some hidden functions there that I have not tested.

[Snorkasaurus]

Not that I am "dissing" CentOS, I actually have been wanting to try setting up a CentOS mail server to see what it is like these days. Unfortunately that involves a lot of testing and I just haven't had the time/inclination for all that. I think it has a "mail system" which includes a number of functions all put together - where Debian just has a load of packages that all have to be installed separately and configured to work with each other.

S.

[Snorkasaurus]

...been wanting to try setting up a CentOS mail server to see what it is like these days

Tried iRedMail on CentOS - what a failure, it doesn't even support aliases unless you buy their "pro edition" which is $400 plus annual renewals of $250 (or lifetime license for $800). *rolls eyes*
S.

[viking60]

Good to know.
Is it better in Debian?

[Snorkasaurus]

Do you mean "Is iRedMail better in Debian?" or do you mean "Is setting up a mail server better in Debian?"? Either way it is a nightmare in comparison to hMailServer. I should have made a link to [url]iRedMail[/url] in my previous post so you could see what it is. In short, it is really just a script that automates the installation and setup of the applications required to run a mail server. Unfortunately, the alternative is to install the separate applications yourself and configure them.

The problem with setting them up independently is that they each have their own config files, their own syntax for those files, their own independent backups, and their own services to monitor. The problem with iRedMail is that the free version is so limited that I have a really hard time believing that it is useful to anyone as anything more than a demo. For years now I have been using hMailServer on Windows. It can setup and use a Microshaft SQL Express database automatically if you want but it is recommended to use something better. Setting up a MySQL database really wasn't a big deal compared to the extra setup on a Linux box. It has all of the features that make sense in an MTA with only one additional application to deal with (instead of a half dozen).

Actually, last night I found out something that really turned me away from a Linux based mail system... none of the available MTA's seem to natively support greylisting, which blocks almost all spam without even having to receive the messages. With apps like Postfix, sendmail, qmail, and Exim (Debian's default MTA) greylisting either does not exist or is another application or plugin to setup, configure, and backup. The one thing I don't like about hMailServer is that it requires .NET v2.0 which frankly is nowhere near as bad as v3.5 or v4.

My 3 cents,
S.