Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 11th Jan 2010 15:57 UTC
Original OSNews Interviews A few weeks ago, we asked for the OSNews community to help with some questions we were going to ask Aaron Griffin from the Arch Linux team, and the response was glorious and somewhat phenomenal. We added those questions to our own and sent them on over, and then we were surprised by receiving not only Aaron Griffin's responses but answers from various individuals from the team.
Permalink for comment 403685
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

For servers, I recommend Ubuntu server. Easy to install and administer. Arch just needs too much care if you are depending on a server, although if you have enough time, an Arch server could be quite interesting.

I've run an Arch Server for a few years now and find it needs very little care because once you set it up how you want it (which should be done at install time) all you need is the updates from the rolling release.


Furthermore, contrary to your reasoning, I've always ranked "easy to administrate" quite low on my list of requirements when choosing a server OS:

I'd sooner spend longer configuring a system, but have it streamlined for my specific requirements and understand the system from the ground up than have a server that took 10 mins to set up but leaves me scratching my head if/when things act abnormally.

Besides, as I've already stated above, a good administrator should only really need to spend the initial set up time and then use (custom) scripts to automate any lengthy or regular jobs to make future administration relatively easy (even on the trickier of systems).

Reply Parent Score: 2