Bud Frede
Tue, 25 Apr 2017
10:18:04 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:
Diesel writes:
Bud Frede
Mon, 24 Apr
2017 10:41:55 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:
Also, I don't run servers using Mint. I don't think it's usable
as a server OS. That's why I stick to Ubuntu (and waited about a
year before using 16.04 for production servers).
I suppose it depends on the servers role, then. For me, it's a
file server essentially. Provides read only access to my other
machines for music/movies/isos, etc. Things I want/need the other
computers to be able to access without them having to store local
copies. Nothing uber fancy. If I was going to run another kind of
server, I'd run CentOS or FreeBSD. Especially if it was facing
the internet.
Even for a plain file server I'd choose something other than
Mint. There's no need for the desktop stuff that Mint includes
on a server.
I don't disagree with you, but, I like the fact I can use the
machine as if it were another computer on the network while it
provides limited file access to others. Think of it as an adhoc
windows network server. Makes more sense to you that way?
FreeBSD is a good choice for a server, and OpenBSD is too. Ubuntu
is not my first choice for a server, but it's what my workplace
has decided on. I'd rather use CentOS or RHEL, and I've been
agitating to move to those.
RHEL is a fantastic option, but, it's not free as far as I know.
https://access.redhat.com/products/r...nux/evaluation
Unless the 30day evaluation is not just the OS, but, support? And
the OS itself is still 'free'? I'm a bit unclear concerning that.
For use at home on my own network, I'd probably go with Debian or
OpenBSD. I don't have any servers setup at home currently, but I'm
planning to make some changes this summer and may add one or two.
(I'm actually thinking of using Raspberry Pi's for that kind of
thing. I guess in that case I'd be looking at Raspbian or Arch
since those seem to be popular.)
I've never gotten into the Raspberry...What makes it so interesting to you?
[snip]
I've got MATE on the older machines that aren't snappy with KDE.
For the ones that can handle it with ease though, I like the eye
candy and additional 'features' out of the box. KDE has spoiled
me rotten. [g]
I did like KDE 1 and 2, and 3 was ok. I've tried all the versions
of KDE, but never stuck with any of them for very long.
I understand. To each his/her own.
I really don't care for the
GUIs present on Vista onwards, I really like XP's GUI...And wish MS
didn't **** it up...Alas.
I have friends that rave about how great KDE is and tell me how
I'd love it if I would use it for a while. Maybe I'll give it a
try again at some point, but for now I'm pretty happy where I'm
at.
LOL! I know what you mean.
--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.