Naturally I don't care about stable releases - they are ancient history even before they get released. Here's the problem with Ubuntu: it imports most of its packages from Debian unstable automatically, but only before DebianImportFreeze day. Jaunty already passed this day (on January 11th) , and Karmic is not available yet, from what I know. Thus Jaunty lags behind for more than month already. That's a big deal, at least for me. Living on the edge is easier with Debian.arborint wrote:You can test your luck with unstable and testing packages from either (and any other) distro, but those are not stable releasesWeirdan wrote:Actually, Ubuntu mostly lags behind Debian, considerably.
Linux guru (Vlad?)
Moderator: General Moderators
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
-
alex.barylski
- DevNet Evangelist
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Winnipeg
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
So I'm living on the edge when I use Debian?Living on the edge is easier with Debian.
Not exactly comforting when my career relies on the successful launch/deployment of a project. Haha.
I use whatever packages apt installs, which I assume are the stable versions?
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
Only if you're updating from unstable branch (which is pretty stable to my taste, your mileage may vary).PCSpectra wrote:So I'm living on the edge when I use Debian?Living on the edge is easier with Debian.
Not exactly comforting is when they ship a package which is years old (and still has all bugs that were fixed quite some time ago). I've had this situation with memcached from debian unstable, just a few days ago, and found out that repository contained version 1.2.2 (released 1.5 years ago) when latest source release was already 1.2.6.PCSpectra wrote: Not exactly comforting when my career relies on the successful launch/deployment of a project. Haha.
Unless you edited your apt.sources file to include unstable or testing repositories, you're on debian stable branch.PCSpectra wrote:I use whatever packages apt installs, which I assume are the stable versions?
-
alex.barylski
- DevNet Evangelist
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Winnipeg
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
OK, that is what I thought, thanks for confirming.Unless you edited your apt.sources file to include unstable or testing repositories, you're on debian stable branch
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
that's not exactly correct. Different distros have different definition of what is considered "stable" or "secure". For example, we use CentOS on our production server which is less cutting-edge but generally considered more "enterprise" and stable.
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
Just a suggestion
since you afraid that something will not come out correctly
run a test with virtual machine maybe use vmware server ( it's free now )
you create a lot of computer there and test it without breaking
the main system
might give you a lot more idea and resolution to your problem
since you afraid that something will not come out correctly
run a test with virtual machine maybe use vmware server ( it's free now )
you create a lot of computer there and test it without breaking
the main system
might give you a lot more idea and resolution to your problem
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
Just to remind you: before moving the server (i.e. changing its IP address) you should set the TTL of your domain server to a very low value - 1 to 5 minutes. Then you have to wait for this new TTL to be populated (this time period is equal to the old TTL of the DNS - usually 1 day). Finally, you can change the IP of the server, change the domain zone files and change the TTL of the DNS back to a normal (i.e. 1 day) value.
This way, during the transfer all DNS related issues are minimized.
This way, during the transfer all DNS related issues are minimized.
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't
Re: Linux guru (Vlad?)
I actually was going to say something similar to what wpsd2006 said, but a bit different.
Take a snapshot of the partition of the current server. Toss it in a VM (I recommend VirtualBox) and sync it so that it's running as the current server is. During the migration, you can use the VM to take the place of the missing server. It will be slower, but it will keep things running. In the mean time, install Debian, get it up to date, and get everything working. Sync the data back from the VM, and hook up the main server again. You can now disable the VM, and performance will be back to normal. If all goes well, downtime should be just a few minutes as you sync the VM/Server and could be done at some ungodly hour so no one notices.
I do, however, have a few side notes.
1. I think Ubuntu makes a far better server than Debian does... it's much more up-to-date, and nearly as stable as Debian Stable. You would NOT want to use either of the Debian rolling releases! Debian is a great system, I used it and was very happy with it for quite a while. I use Ubuntu now because it JUST WORKS (well, much more so than Debian ever did!). That said...
2. VNC!? Ubuntu Server does not install X, or any desktop. How do you have VNC? If you really wanted to go in remotely with a desktop, try FreeNX. It's a far superior option to VNC, if you don't want to use or can't use SSH. (SSH+Xephyr will also be a decent option if you want a remote "desktop" kind of thing that's not permanent.)
3. Finally..... as root, from command line, run What does it say? It should say something like this:
-OmniUni
Take a snapshot of the partition of the current server. Toss it in a VM (I recommend VirtualBox) and sync it so that it's running as the current server is. During the migration, you can use the VM to take the place of the missing server. It will be slower, but it will keep things running. In the mean time, install Debian, get it up to date, and get everything working. Sync the data back from the VM, and hook up the main server again. You can now disable the VM, and performance will be back to normal. If all goes well, downtime should be just a few minutes as you sync the VM/Server and could be done at some ungodly hour so no one notices.
I do, however, have a few side notes.
1. I think Ubuntu makes a far better server than Debian does... it's much more up-to-date, and nearly as stable as Debian Stable. You would NOT want to use either of the Debian rolling releases! Debian is a great system, I used it and was very happy with it for quite a while. I use Ubuntu now because it JUST WORKS (well, much more so than Debian ever did!). That said...
2. VNC!? Ubuntu Server does not install X, or any desktop. How do you have VNC? If you really wanted to go in remotely with a desktop, try FreeNX. It's a far superior option to VNC, if you don't want to use or can't use SSH. (SSH+Xephyr will also be a decent option if you want a remote "desktop" kind of thing that's not permanent.)
3. Finally..... as root, from command line, run
Code: Select all
/etc/init.d/ssh startCode: Select all
* Starting OpenBSD Secure Shell server sshd [ OK ]