Preserved Topic: Acquired a server... need help!

I've just acquired an 80mhz server with a 5 disk (scsi) raid config + 80mb ram, and was wondering if anyone could suggest an appropriate OS for this?

Win2k/NT Server are too resource hungry, and to be frank, pose too much of a security risk, so I was thinking Linux would be more appropriate, but given my unfamiliarity with this OS, some advice would be hugely appreciated. (User testimonials are so much more useful than corporate techno-babble in such cases).

Essentially, I'm wondering which 'flavour' of linux have you had most success with - and how much of the OS is required?
I don't need end-user-components, since it'll be exclusively used for serving web pages.

I am also considering PHP over IIS - again, I've limited experience and any advice would be appreciated.

I realise this could get quite in-depth (fingers crossed), so please feel free to email me.
In fact, I/you/we could always summise the info in the Asylum if you like, so that the knowledge gets shared, and as a gesture of good-will, I'll happily create a site (served from the beast once it's online), to illustrate the decisions taken and the process of getting it up and running. (If that's of interest to anyone)

Well, that's it for now.
I hope someone can help.

In antisssi,,,,,,,, pation - many thanks.




Reality is that which refuses to go away when I stop believing in it.
Cell number: 698

hello Dufty,

I never setup a linux/win server for public use.
I set them up without taking security patches into consideration.

I found setting up IIS/MySql/PHP is much easier than setting up apache on linux.

So sorry, i can't help you set it up for the public, but i can for personal use.

lallous: If all else fails, and I decide to use it as a local server, I'll drop you a line - cheers.
I'd like to try the public http server aproach first though - If nothing else, it'll give me somewhere to host my images, without worrying about monthly bandwidth volumes.

I'm just curious what he means by "acquired."

heh - nothing underhand - read as "Was Given"
A coleague had it gathering dust in his attic and asked if it was any use to me - had to say yes

It sounds like you already made up your mind.

Linux is a great OS, and its extremely easy to learn. I'm a big advocate of buying the boxed set. I first bought my set of RedHat Linux 5.2 about a year and a half ago. It was an outdated version in some shit-hole of computer store and they over charged me ($60 for an old copy) it never actually ran on my computer because it didn't support a good portion of my hardware. Of course I did read the books extensively and then downloaded 7.0. I learned a lot from the books, more then I could possibly have learned from a website. Don't get me wrong, theres plenty of resources on the net. But you can only learn so much from asking questions,

Apache is a great server. I would spend the money on the boxed set of RedHat (or any distro you choose) and spend a few weeks or months getting to learn the system. You can dual boot both RedHat and Windows.

-Jestah
Cell 277

Yep, I'd agree with Jestah. Since you said you have little knowledge of Linux, Redhat would probably be best.
Up in the cslab where I'm working now, we have a room of about 6-7 computers set aside for the sole purpose of trying out hardware/software combinations, different OS's, different methods of networking them together, just about anything you can think of. Awhile back a few people got together and tried the three different 'flavors' of Linux that we have, and the unanimous decision was that Redhat is the one to go with if you aren't familiar with Linux.

________________________________________________________________
-- Jack of all trades, master of that which has my attention at
the moment.

Unoriginal Cell 693

Thanks Jestah - I have considered buying a distro, and that's where the confusion starts - suse / red hat / other - where do I turn? And to top it all of, there's now the United Lnux model (which is pretty misleading and threatens to separate the Linux community by the suggestion that non-united ditros are somehow inferior!).

I've heard rave reviews about Apache, and this is probably going to be the server component of choice, but I'm still reluctant to dive in and buy a distro without hearing good/bad stories from users experiences.

You mention RedHat - is this because it's the first you happened upon, or did you buy it because its reputation preceded it?

<edit>Is RedHat compatible with scsi-raid systems?</edit>

[This message has been edited by Dufty (edited 09-12-2002).]