Linode Forum

[kstannard]

I have only had very basic experience with Linux (Ubuntu 9.10) and would like to set up a practice Ubuntu virtual machine on my laptop before letting myself loose on a Linode account.

Which edition of Ubuntu should I install on my VM?

I have previously experimented with the desktop edition, but would it be better to practice with the server edition? Or perhaps some other edition alltogether?

Any tips to help get my practice VM as similar to what I can expect at Linode would be great.

Thanks

[vonskippy]

Install VirtualBox on your Lappy - create a VM (use whatever mem limits and drive space your Linode will have) - install your distro of choice - preferably without a GUI (they're all the same - unless you use RHEL/CentOS/SuseEnterprise which are specifically made for stable/secure server setups).

AFAIK - there is no difference in Ubuntu between regular and server - except that server doesn't have a GUI (but I could be wrong - I don't use Ubuntu - to unstable for server use in my opinion).

[mwaterous]

So I don't go completely off topic, I would suggest if you're intending on setting this up to practice before setting up a Linode, you should be installing the closest facsimile that you can. In other words, go with the Server edition and install it barebones to start with - having a GUI to do any part of the process will impede your learning.

Now for the off topic, and I probably shouldn't because this is a personal choice kind of thing, but - vonskippy, any particular reason you think it's too unstable for server use? I'm not suggesting it is or isn't, I'm a programmer by trade and not a system administrator, but I've been running Ubuntu for a long time now and never had any issues with it not being stable or secure. I used to run straight Debian back in the days of Red Hat and their silly IPO, left Linux altogether for awhile and when I came back Ubuntu seemed like a nice off-shoot of my once favorite distro.

[vonskippy]

Your mileage may vary.

For me - all my servers are RHEL/CentOS/Windows2008 and my desktops are mostly WinXP/Win7 and a few Linux Mint (a Ubuntu fork). I'm afraid for me (a Molecular Biophysicist) the year of the linux desktop is many many many many years away (once again - it's not a bad OS - but the apps have a loooooooooooooooooong way to go - especially in the chemistry/physics/math/lab equipment arena).

Server wise, Ubuntu is just a tad to bleeding edge (makes for a nice desktop - but not so much for a server). It's not so much the OS - but the choice of App's that cause the buggyness (just once I'd like to see Ubuntu focus on LESS bugs in their 6 month release instead of plopping in more buggy apps and worrying about what stupid name and ugly brown background to use).

RHEL/CentOS focuses on stability and security - so for me - that works best (besides, my personal preference is YUM/SERVICE over APT/INIT.D)

[mwaterous]

RedHat's come a long way in the last decade then. I haven't touched a release of theirs since '99 because all they seemed to be concerned about back in the day was how best to emulate Windows.

It was so easy back then. Red Hat, Slackware, Debian... now everybody and their dog has a distro.

I'll have to pick up a distro that uses YUM, that's another thing I've never played with.

[kstannard]

I will stick with Ubuntu for the time being as my requirements are hopefully not too complicated. From what I have seen there appears to be a good size community and plenty of support material for Ubuntu which is obviously important for me at this stage.

Thanks for your suggestions.

[JKWood]

Ubuntu has a bad habit of patching new bugs into software, which is why I avoid it in... well, pretty much any situation, to be honest.

I personally stick with Slackware because I don't have to worry about third-party bloat or strange undocumented patches in what I run.

[Guspaz]

JKWood wrote: Ubuntu has a bad habit of patching new bugs into software, which is why I avoid it in... well, pretty much any situation, to be honest.

I personally stick with Slackware because I don't have to worry about third-party bloat or strange undocumented patches in what I run.

So, Slackware fixes the problem where package managers might apply updates that introduce new bugs by... having no package manager! Brilliant!

I also hear that a good way to secure your VPS is to run "ifconfig eth0 down".

[glg]

Guspaz wrote: JKWood wrote: Ubuntu has a bad habit of patching new bugs into software, which is why I avoid it in... well, pretty much any situation, to be honest.

I personally stick with Slackware because I don't have to worry about third-party bloat or strange undocumented patches in what I run.

So, Slackware fixes the problem where package managers might apply updates that introduce new bugs by... having no package manager! Brilliant!

I also hear that a good way to secure your VPS is to run "ifconfig eth0 down".

Gotta love how when a user comes in asking a question about a specific distro, people feel the need to come in with their advocacy of another distro. I greatly prefer .deb to .rpm, but I'm not going to go tell people asking specific questions about centos or fedora or redhat that they really should just stop and switch to ubuntu or debian.

[Guspaz]

glg wrote: Guspaz wrote: JKWood wrote: Ubuntu has a bad habit of patching new bugs into software, which is why I avoid it in... well, pretty much any situation, to be honest.

I personally stick with Slackware because I don't have to worry about third-party bloat or strange undocumented patches in what I run.

So, Slackware fixes the problem where package managers might apply updates that introduce new bugs by... having no package manager! Brilliant!

I also hear that a good way to secure your VPS is to run "ifconfig eth0 down".

Gotta love how when a user comes in asking a question about a specific distro, people feel the need to come in with their advocacy of another distro. I greatly prefer .deb to .rpm, but I'm not going to go tell people asking specific questions about centos or fedora or redhat that they really should just stop and switch to ubuntu or debian.

How exactly is my poking fun at Slackware considered advocating another distro? I think you quoted the wrong message.

[hoopycat]

What's this "distribution" stuff you're talking about? Is that like BUFFALO?

Code: [linode6554321@newark255 lish]# buffalo

BUFFALO 3.4 (ext) - Bit User Fast Friendly Aid to Logical Operation
>asm 6000

6000 LDAA #BEEF
     > cake 6100
     42 61 00
6003 HCF
     > ldaa 23
     96 23
6005 MOAR $9001
     > cmpa #urmom
     B1 FF FF
>g 6000


That's what I get... maybe it's just because I have the Linode plan with 360 bytes of SRAM.

[JKWood]

glg wrote: Gotta love how when a user comes in asking a question about a specific distro, people feel the need to come in with their advocacy of another distro. I greatly prefer .deb to .rpm, but I'm not going to go tell people asking specific questions about centos or fedora or redhat that they really should just stop and switch to ubuntu or debian.

The question was asked about not preferring Ubuntu. My observation was related to that topic. If the OP wants to use Ubuntu, they're certainly welcome to, but suitability for server use is not necessarily one of the big draws of it - the wide availability of community help is. Gentoo is well known for documentation, Slackware is well known for control. People have different priorities. The ability to have a grown-up conversation about choice of Linux distros makes us mature, not trolls.

[glg]

Guspaz wrote: How exactly is my poking fun at Slackware considered advocating another distro? I think you quoted the wrong message.

I was agreeing with you