What is Digg?39 Comments
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"Debian won't be on the same level as Red Hat or Novell, though, Wade said. HP won't market it, and customers will have to download the software on their own. Software combinations with partners such as BEA Systems or Oracle won't be available with Debian. And HP won't formally certify Debian for its servers."
So basically, the gist of the article is,
"We hired a guy that knows about Debian to write a script for our Indian technical support staff to use. We're not actually doing anything differently than what we used to do, you still have to do everything yourself, and we're not even going to certify its use on our hardware, but Hodjii would be happy to answer any questions you may have." - Zer0Fade, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12***** finally!
- bigtomrodney, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Pretty good. I like it. I wonder will they extend this to any other distros, considering in the past they have shipped SUSE on their laptops. And with all of the Ubuntu press and its Debian roots, will it be extended there?
- shakin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Part of what makes Linux useful is specialization. Microsoft is even trying to get there by releasing something like eight versions of Windows Vista, although Linux still has a huge advantage in specialization because it's more customizable. A Windows router on a floppy would be impossible, for example.
As a firewall, for instance, neither Windows or Red Hat can compete with the IPCop Linux distro. Each Linux distro offers something unique whether it be computer forensics, network appliances, servers, or desktops. Each Linux vendor contributes code to improve their own distro, then that code filters down through all vendors and all Linux distros become better. - gopal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7What is important here is (from the article):
"Debian won't be on the same level as Red Hat or Novell, though, Wade said. HP won't market it, and customers will have to download the software on their own. Software combinations with partners such as BEA Systems or Oracle won't be available with Debian. And HP won't formally certify Debian for its servers."
That reflects their embrace for Debian. - jjkurtz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6HP actually worked with Ubuntu to provide a specialized Hoary release for their business notebooks. These modifications were incorporated into subsequent Ubuntu releases but nothing in the line of support has been mentioned. Maybe with Ubuntu's great strides in getting Linux to "just work" on the desktop this will change.
- tropican8, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Funny you should say that, its one of the major things being worked on right now. http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/GUI Its in the 'daily' install cds for testing, just type "installgui" (without quotes) at the boot: prompt.
- fintler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6woo...another distro I might be able to use at work :D
- blixel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"the only one that i had any trouble getting installed and configured is debian."
Hmm.... Debian is quite easy to install. So I'm going to assume you mean it was hard to get the X Window System up and running? If that's the case, trust me, it's easy once you've done it a couple of times. The thing I love about Debian is that it's just a bare bones install. When you're done installing, you are at a command line and it's up to you to add what you want/need.
My own personal belief is that X doesn't belong on a server. (Just my opinion. If others want X on their server, that's their prerogative.) The Debian advantage is that you are forced to learn a few things that you don't have to learn with distros like Ubuntu. In the case of a Desktop, I'd say the Ubuntu method is probably better suited for most people. But you mentioned you were installing on a server. My own personal opinion is that a server administrator is held to a higher technical standard than the average Desktop user.
Spend some time with Debian. It truly is a great distribution. If you want to accelerate your learning, I *highly* recommend "The Debian System: Concepts and Techniques" by Martin F. Krafft. (No Starch Press). It is an outstanding book.
Don't worry about having X on your server. (Unless there is some reason you actually require it. I would be interested in knowing what that requirement was.) All server programs (daemons) can be fully configured/controlled from the command line. Whether it's Apache, PostgreSQL/MySQL, OpenLDAP, Postfix/Sendmail, or whatever ... none of them require a graphical interface to manage them. My main server doesn't even have a video card or keyboard/mouse. I administrate the box by logging into it via ssh. - babbling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The number of Linux-based operating systems with any considerable number of users is at most about 5. I'm thinking of: Ubuntu, Red Hat, Debian, SUSE and Gentoo.
These really are different operating systems. They are similar because they run some of the same software. (Linux kernel, Gnome, KDE, and programs written for unix operating systems)
There is "just one Linux", and it's at kernel.org. There are many different operating systems that use the Linux kernel, just as there are a few different Windows operating systems that use similar kernels. - Chandon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why are there so many versions of Windows? Wouldn't it be easier if the Windows CE team, the Windows XP Home team, the Windows Vista Beta team, and the Windows 2003 server team all worked together?
- krewemaynard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"[HP] will offer technical support for installation and configuration during a server's warranty period, Wade said. And later this year, it will begin selling "care packs" to help customers with Debian problems, he said."
...
"HP won't market it, and customers will have to download the software on their own."
Sounds to me like they won't throw you off the support line for using an unsupported OS. They won't be actively pushing Debian because there's no money in it for them. However, they realize that many customers prefer Debian and Debian-based distros, and they're working to bring them over to HP.
This is a good move. I use Ubuntu on my desktops and servers. Most enterprise-level apps, however, only offer official support for RPM-based distros (SUSE and RedHat). The more Debian support there is out there, the better. - ejstacey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3From the article, I see this applying to servers more than workstations/laptops/etc.
If this means HP releases .deb's of it's server monitoring programs (and drivers, although quite a few are already built into later 2.6 kernels...), then it's awesome. We're currently looking for another linux OS to replace an aging RH8 on our systems. Debian was thrown out of the "potential" group because HP doesn't have support for them. This changes that. - jcidiotashram, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i think they want to sell HP with the publicity stunt like supporting debian.
i guess there is no point in cheering that it is about time.
HP is thinking what debian can do for them, instead what they can offer to debian - jsusanka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2seems more like a handhold to me. guess we won't see HP recommends Debian on their website.
so what is it that they are supporting - with the above statement not sure what it leaves
I am just a little tired of flap from companies that say they support linux but yet have we recommend windows xp on their website.
this is nothing to get excited about - - rageguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Group hug time Debian fans.
- bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2you are right. the thing i had problem with is x windows. I know i realy dont need x on my server but it is just a lot easyer for me to get every thing set up using X. i am still learning linux and i feel alot more comfortable running xfce or gnu to configure every thing the stoping x after i finish.
- motang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes this is definitely good, and if this increases we could be more of the manufactures carry this. I have Ubuntu running on my laptop that I just bough but I still had to pay close to $100 for windows that I don't use. So this will eliminate that need for an extra $100 bucks that they put into the price for the licensing fee. And more distros they offer the more people they can attract.
- jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2er, thats weird, because Debian was (aside from Ubuntu and OpenSuse, which aren't intended to server os's) the easiest server operating system I've ever had the pleasure to install. Easier than Windows, even...
- blixel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"it is just a lot easyer for me to get every thing set up using X."
Could you elaborate a little? I'm genuinely curious what specifically is easier under the X Window System? Installing new programs is such an automated task that I can't really see how it's any easier under X than just using the command line. When you run Synaptic and click the program you want to install, and then click "Apply", the .deb package is downloaded and installed. Synaptic doesn't present you with a "wizard" or anything like that to configure the program. So I don't really see it as being any easier than just typing (for example) "apt-get install postifx" as the root user. (Or better yet, install sudo, give yourself permission to use it, and then type "sudo apt-get install postfix.)
From the command line, to update your package database, you just type "sudo apt-get update" which is the same as clicking "Reload" in Synaptic.
Typing "sudo apt-get upgrade" is the same as clicking "Mark All Upgrades" in Synaptic.
By learning just 3 or 4 simple, short commands, you can save yourself from having to install hundreds of megabytes worth of graphical "crap" that isn't even needed. I understand that disk space probably isn't an issue on your system. That really isn't the point though. On a server system, the administrator should ideally have a complete account of every single file on the system. The fewer files you have, the easier it is to maintain a secure system. (Takes less time to check for root kits for example.) And just generally speaking, the file system hierarchy is SO much cleaner without a bunch of X libs, X binaries, GTK libs, XFCE libs/binaries, and so on.
It's also MUCH faster to update your system when you don't have all that extra cruft. Updates to core packages like binutils, passwd, and so on are usually very small updates. Updates to GTK are pretty massive in comparison. Takes more time to download the update, takes more time to apply the update, and there is a greater chance that something will go wrong with a huge update than there is with a smaller update.
And besides installing/updating programs, what would be easier about configuring a program under the X Window System than just using the command line? Programs like Postfix, Apache, and all the others I mentioned are just configured via a plain text file anyway. It's not Apache comes with some gee-whiz graphical pointy-clicky config tool with a fisher price interface. Under X, you would just be editing the main.cf file (for Postfix) in a text editor anyway.
Just my point of view of course... maybe I'm "missing" something? - blixel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"All of those factors put to gether is what caused me to not go with debian. I know it is a good operating system since digg is using it. but it is still just a little out of reach for most mid to lower level techs. like me."
That's cool. It doesn't sound like you really need a heavily optimized server, so I'm sure Ubuntu will suit your needs just fine. It's a fine distribution in my opinion and is capable of doing most (perhaps all) things you could do with pure Debian. In your original message, I kinda thought you were wanting to learn more about System Administration in general.
Here in my house, I have 2 tiny embedded computers. One runs OpenBSD, the other runs Debian. The Debian box is just kind of a "toy" system for me. I don't have any production stuff on it. I just use it for experimentation sake.
I like the actual act of System Administration. I find the task of installing and mainting a *BSD/Linux system enjoyable. Auditing the initial system, setting up cron jobs, disabling any default daemons that aren't needed, enabling new daemons I want to have running, running netstat to find out what ports are open and on which interface they are listening, setting up packet filtering to add another layer of security, setting up user accounts and implementing a group strategy for the various accounts, setting up disk quotas, configuring the mail server, monitoring the system logs, etc... etc... all fun stuff! :) - jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Way to go Debian!
- mentor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ITYM Debian GNU/Linux. There's not a complete busybox/uclibc port yet :)
Anyway, I hope this means that HP will be giving specifications to all their hardware so we can write drivers/support for it. - foobarra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I believe the level of HP support for Debian will only increase - HP understands that "enterprise" Linux distro marketing is sometimes just fluff and money spent on building supported third-party software certification (ala Oracle), as well as offering some sort of comfort level for inexperienced admins and users. Of course they will support the big names - these are the names that unknowing users recognize.
The real value behind Debian is that it is a solid, stable OS that can offer compliance beyond simply installing third-party packages, and having that third-party "support" the install. You can still install Oracle on Debian just as simply, only Oracle will not "support" it...
I think a key validation here is that HP has backed Debian's Carrier Grade Linux (CGL) certification - something that the other "enterprise" distributors have a long road to achieving.
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3611126
http://wiki.debian.org/Debian-CGL - bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I do understand what you mean.as far as it being better to not install x but i have plunty of diskspace and not many demands on the server. just a web server and game server. Last time i got every thing installedI didnt touch it untill I had a hard drive failure some 3 years lator wich i am reinstalling every thing from that now. My main thing is I am not good with vi or any othere comand line editor. It is mostly just what i feel comfortable with. and the fact that i like having the ability to be able to use a gui when ever i need to.
Realy i know it is stupid for me to have it installed but my problem is i want it to be easy to install. The main problem most people dont switch to linux is because of problems geting what they want working to work. so i think it should be a choise to install a gui.
All most all distributions i have dealt with give you the option to install or not install a gui. i just think that is how it should be.
Also the install menu is a little confusing to me. compaired to rhel fedora suse ubuntu or most othere distibutions. were it is just point and click and thourly explaind.
All of those factors put to gether is what caused me to not go with debian. I know it is a good operating system since digg is using it. but it is still just a little out of reach for most mid to lower level techs. like me. - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"The company has a long history of cooperation with Debian. It formerly employed one Debian leader, Bruce Perens, and another former leader and current contributor, Bdale Garbee, is chief technologist of HP's Open Source and Linux Organization."
that's like saying HP has a long history of cooperation with Apple because Woz once worked for them. - giancydni, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Great! now I have another reason to stick with my favorite distros.. MEPIS and *buntu..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hubba hubba!!
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ok, thanks for the info.
btw I was just asking a question, why do people digg me down? ***** fanboys. - blixel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I dont realy know how to explane what i am trying to say. Linux needs to feel like windows is if people are going to switch."
Nonsense. :) Windows is hardly the holy grail of operating systems. People switch away from MS Windows because they want a more professional and robust operating system.
There are people all over the world who are learning UNIX-like operating systems for the first time, having no knowledge of Windows and they get by just fine.
Rather than worrying about making Linux look exactly like Windows, and work exactly like Windows, spend some time forcing yourself to unlearn all the bad habits you've picked up under Windows. Spend as much time as you possibly can outside of the X Window System. The whole concept of "I want it easy now, I'll learn the "hard way" later..." is flawed thinking. (In my opinion.)
In school, you always learn the long way of doing things *first* ... once that is drilled into your head, then you'll learn a shortcut or two. But you have to have that fundamental understanding first. - bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I also like learning to do all the system admining stuff also. i find it fun. my main thing is i do not want to use windows any more. i want to switch to linux for all my server needs. i have my main server then i have 2 i play with and learn on but just for the time while i am still learning i want every thing to be as easy to use as it can be.
I am currently working at a college and all our servers are running windows. it would be alot cheaper and we would have a lot better uptime if we switched to linux. but none of the othere techs besides me have any experience with linux. so in order to make the switch as seamless as posible we would need a gui.
I dont realy know how to explane what i am trying to say. Linux needs to feel like windows is if people are going to switch. and with windows you can just do all the defaults and the server will boot with a gui. Linux is great because you can chose wheather or not you want a gui but the option needs to be there so people can feel comfortable in there switch.
Just because debian is a great operating system it still needs to work on its eas of use. I do think it is nice just giving you the bas system and being able to configure from there. but how hard would it be to give you the choise between a base system and a base system witha gui.
also it is great being able to discuse this witha person who wont kill you for saying somethign they dont like about there favorit operating sytems. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@chris
Most distributions are derived from Debian. A "distribution" is just that: a way of organizing and updating software from all the separate projects - GNU, OSDL Apache, OpenOffice, etc. that go into a usable system.
The Linux kernel, in all these distributions, is the same. Multiple distributions give you the choice of which software from which of these projects is delivered, and how it is maintained.
Consider, for example, embedded Linux. For that, you are basically creating and supporting your own distribution, so the value a company like Montavista adds is tools for doing that. If you have a desktop machine and you need quick, easy Linux, try Ubuntu.
Now consider why Microsoft finds it hard to keep up with Linux for: servers, routers, firewalls, telephone switches, desktops, phones, TVs, cars, etc. Microsoft has to build the support for each vertical market in-house. Linux has multiple distributions. - cyberrigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'll believe it when HP offers all of their Desktops and Laptops preinstalled with Linux.
Companies selling preinstalled Linux Desktops and Laptops.
http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/23168/
HP, it's your turn. - jjkurtz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Good for Hodjii, nothing special for the rest of us.
- buddhax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0At HP, at the internal data centers, we're allowed to use any Debian based distro we want, just so long as it's Red Hat, Suse, Windows or Web Logic. Clearly, this support is just a willingness to sell servers to anyone and accept consulting/support money from anyone.
- krewemaynard, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5I want a million dollars and a Snickers. Get in line.
Oh, and I'm not touching you. - bobothn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Sorry this isn't flame bait but debian needs to make there install easier. i just recently installed 8 distros on my server trying to find the one i like best and the only one that i had any trouble getting installed and configured is debian. Actually the weird thing is the OS i finally chose was xubuntu. witch is debian but very easy to install and work with.
- ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3Sounds like a bunch of PR BS.
HP used to BE the *****....now they are JUST *****.
Sad. - chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -17/+1Why isn't there just 1 version of Linux?
Would it not have a better chance in the real world if all those talented developers got together? Right now it's not Mircosoft or Linux, it's more like Mircosoft or 'insert 50 different server versions with 50 different setups/problems'
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is