[Sussex] A funny thing happened on the way to the Net

[Gareth Ablett]

Hey all,

I think in some way we are getting away from the original question here, I
do belive this was down to numbers in the world getting used for web
servers. rather then the Gentoo for/against argument that so often comes up.

Both sides of the argument have valid points, what I think would be a
(although most likely not available) valid addition to the fuel for this
argument is a document stating what types of people use these OS's. or just
a general useage graph, in the sence co-lo/private/corporate/provider
hosted/etc.

I'm sure we would end up seeing a large quantity of corporate and provide
hosted servers using RH and DEB, but the thing to think of is that with ADSL
and cheaper internet services, people will use what ever there used to to
host a website, and well a lot of people like Gentoo.


On 15/12/05, Dominic Humphries <linux at oneandoneis2.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Steve Dobson <steve at dobson.org>:
> > Then I have to ask what is the point of Gentoo?  If you get the same
> > software as Debian/sid or Fedora then why were you paying the compile
> > time costs that Gentoo requires.
>
> Since I just leave emerge running overnight, as far as I'm concerned,
> there's no
> such cost. But that's just me :o)
>
> > I am trying to explore how the differences between the various Linux
> > distros are good for business rather than the differences themselves.
> ...
> > Believe me, there is so, so much more to performance tuning then just
> setting
> > a few switches on the compiler.
>
> I'm sure there is. But to use your logic in an earlier reply, i.e.
>
> > If you were creating a web hosting business and could offer only one
> > software which would you go for?  The one that offered the best
> > performance (or cutting edge tech) or the one that offered the most
> > stability?)
>
> If *you* were creating a web hosting business and had the choice of:
>
> A distro that's very stable but uses software compiled -with-kitchen-sink
> and
> for an old CPU
>
> -or-
>
> A distro that's very stable but uses software with unnecessary
> functionality
> easily stripped out and for your current CPU. . .


Yes Gentoo is stable if setup to do so, but you wont see one with an uptime
that beats debian and redhat servers.

then why *wouldn't* you choose the latter?
>
> Especially since, if you need to make sure your software is completely
> optimized, you had to make changes to the source & compile it regardless
> of
> which distro you chose?
>
> After all, it's surely easier to use a source-based distro if you're going
> to
> modify source? Using Debian but compiling the software to get it 100%
> optimized, you're still paying the compile-time penalty, and you're
> working
> *against* the packaging system, instead of having it work *for* you.
>
> Again, these are the thoughts of somebody who's never sysadmin'd
> anything but a
> desktop PC. But you *did* ask ;o)



--

Regards
Gareth
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/sussex/attachments/20051216/3524c9c0/attachment.htm