On 22 Apr 15:17, Bobby Moss wrote: <snip />
Back on topic, CentOS (to all intents and purposes) is RHEL. The focus is on security and stability over fancy new features, and the tools you use on top to harden it are military-grade. Security patches are rolled out quickly & new improvements only arrive after they've been tested to death. (You could even secure it further with something like Oracle Linux, which is essentially RHEL with a hardened kernel). They've also made a lot of sensible decisions when it comes to default settings etc and it's very easy to scale.
See, now I've watched many a times a security update hit Debian well before RHEL or CentOS, so I generally consider Debian Stable as the right way forwards... that and it's not full of rpm hell where actually half the stuff you're running is either self compiled or coming from non-official sources... ;)
So long as your copy of CentOS comes from a reputable source the only difference should be that you're not paying Red Hat for a support contract. I count DO's pre-built CentOS images as being quite reputable. If you don't, we can agree to disagree on that.
Mmmhmm.
Ubuntu seems to me like a desktop distribution that's trying to behave like a server OS. While you can use it for small web servers (I use it for my own WordPress blog) I question how scalable it is. You may have counter examples to refute this.
I don't, and wouldn't, run Umbongo on anything other than a toy machine with out direct interwebnets access.
IMHO if you want to use a Debian-based server OS I've found Debian is probably a better choice, as it seems to strike a good balance between new features/security patches and keeping things stable.
New features don't happen in stable, at all, ever. They might happen in backports, and then you generally want to know that the backport maintainer is sane and timely.
In the case of BSD: in general you have security systems that go right the way down to kernel level, as (particularly in the case of FreeBSD) their focus is on being "secure by design". There's also an element of security through obscurity you gain by using it too. We could also talk about how amazing BSD server uptime is.
Ultimately it's up to you which BSD you want to use. FreeBSD & OpenBSD would both work in a server setup. I'd question the use of PC-BSD though as that's aimed more as a desktop OS.
Both are a PITA to keep up to date, though, Debian all the way! (OK, so there is Debian GNU/kFreeBSD for those that *really* *really* want a FreeBSD kernel :))
Cheers,