"reccomended" version of RedHat?

[Warren Togami]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erich S." <sharky at websharx.com>
To: "Linux & Unix Advocates & Users" <luau at list.luau.hi.net>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:43 PM
Subject: [luau] "reccomended" version of RedHat?


>
> Aloha Folks! :)
>
> I'm planning on putting up a linux server in as a mutual file storage area
> for a mixed PC/Mac environment. Aside from file storage, it'd be used as a
> staging and test area for web developement (Apache, PHP, mySQL).
>

No matter what distro you use, you will want the latest Samba, Netatalk,
PHP, and mySQL.  I suggest compiling your own or find packages made
specifically for your distro.  While Redhat (or other distros) will release
updated packages for security vulnerabilities in these packages, you may
want even newer versions for certain functionalities which you may need.
For example, only very recent Samba releases have limited support for
Windows 2000 PDC.

Also be sure to immediately turn off all services and upgrade packages when
install any distro.  Redhat 6.x and 7 are being frequently cracked by the
"Ramen Worm," while other distros have many vulnerabilites.  Always check
errata and upgrade.  If you're using Redhat use their Redhat Network.  Its
convenient and easy with up2date.  No more looking for mirror FTP's and
stuff.

Install Ximian Gnome on any distro too.  Ximian has a convenient GUI
installer and upgrader, even better than Redhat.  Ximian Gnome is just plain
good.

> For lack of serious experience with any of the other distro's and wanting
> to work with something that I'm familiar with I'm looking at using RedHat.

Don't discount the possibility of Mandrake too.  Mandrake uses the same RPM
system, and is made to be very compatible with Redhat packages.  However, it
may not be compatible with Redhat 7 packages.

Also think about Immunix 6.2 or soon to be released 7.0.  Immunix is based
on Redhat, but they re-compile everything with their Stackguard compiler
which prevents many buffer overflow stack smashing situations.  Other than
their compiler, everything else is the same, except theoretically more
secure.

>
> I've heard a few negative comments regarding the recent RedHat 7, and am
> not so interested in the latest and greatest, but a good stable version
> that can be patched with latest security fixes and run with a minimum of
> fuss. I've got an old RedHat 6.0 on CD, but am concerned that it may be a
> bit too old.

Redhat 7 is not a bad distro, though it takes some work to make it work.
The problem with Redhat 7 is they included an experimental compiler that
breaks compilation of kernels, some SQL software and others which I
currently can't remember.  However, their gcc works fine for almost anything
else.  They provide "kgcc" which is a stable version of gcc to compile
kernels and other stuff which may break with Redhat 7's gcc.  With a simple
change in the Makefile you can switch your compile from gcc to kgcc.

Don't be scared off by this!  Redhat 7 works.  Its stable for most people.
Works great on three of my machines.  More and more people are reluctantly
releasing Redhat 7 binary RPM's for 3rd party software.  Install the compat
libraries stuff for 6.2 and all old software should work fine.

They also include one of the newest 4.0.x XFree86 packages, which is a plus
for multimedia and gaming.  You wont have that in Redhat 6.2.  You can also
use the old 3.3.6 if you want.

>
> Should I take the plunge with 7, patch up my ole 6.0, or get something
> in-between? Also, anyone else out there using a Linux server in a mixed
> PC/Mac enviroment for shared file storage?
>

Go for Redhat 7, or even better, Immunix 7.0.  You can use Redhat 6.2 too,
but make sure you upgrade everything.  I don't recommend using 6.0, as 6.2
has the same stuff but with less bugs.