The best file system...

[kamper]

Originally posted by: jimbob200521
I prefer NTFS for a file system and Fedora Core for an OS on a file server.

 

[stash]

And IIS shouldn't be starting by default on all Windows installs.

It doesn't.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: jimbob200521
I prefer NTFS for a file system and Fedora Core for an OS on a file server.

I don't think ment "at the same time".

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: jimbob200521
I prefer NTFS for a file system and Fedora Core for an OS on a file server.

I don't think ment "at the same time".

Well, it IS possible to use NTFS on Fedora Core...

 

[thesix]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: drag
I don't think ment "at the same time".

Well, it IS possible to use NTFS on Fedora Core...

However is that really _the_ "NTFS" kamper prefers to use

 

[Journer]

Originally posted by: thesix
Have you been living under a rock? Ten reasons to reformat your hard drives.

looks pretty kinky

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: stash

And IIS shouldn't be starting by default on all Windows installs.

It doesn't.

hehe, someone stuck back at y2k.

 

[Nothinman]

Have you been living under a rock? Ten reasons to reformat your hard drives.

Yea, everytime I find a machine with Solaris on it I want to format it too.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Have you been living under a rock? Ten reasons to reformat your hard drives.

Yea, everytime I find a machine with Solaris on it I want to format it too.

Don't be mean to Solaris

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: stash

And IIS shouldn't be starting by default on all Windows installs.

It doesn't.

I know that. :roll:

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Have you been living under a rock? Ten reasons to reformat your hard drives.

Yea, everytime I find a machine with Solaris on it I want to format it too.

lol, nice. Didn't Solaris develop XFS?

For a file server I would recommend Debian and ext3. Ext3 is the tops when it comes to reliability and data integrity. You don't need the speed increase of XFS and if you love your data, you will never even utter the word "ReiserFS" in it's presence.

I use CentOS (because I've been using Redhat distros since 1998) but I am hoping to learn the ropes with Debian and Ubuntu, for various reasons. On my personal file server, I use Centos, installed on a 20 gig drive, then I have 2 120 gig drives in a software Raid that my Samba file share is on.

I also put apache and mysql on it, and run Torrentflux through that. Torrentflux is a web based bittorrent client, so torrents download directly to my file server. Of course there is no GUI installed. I use the webmin for general administration, SWAT for Samba administration and ssh when I need the command line. I don't even have a keyboard, mouse, or monitor attached to the server.

I would stay away from Fedora just because the support cycle is too short. When accessing the box through a webpage or file share, you are not going to see any benefits with Fedora over CentOS (or Debian) and once you get it set up, you don't want to have to rebuild it every year to keep it up to date. CentOS and Debian both have very long support cycles (something like 6 years for both).

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Have you been living under a rock? Ten reasons to reformat your hard drives.

Yea, everytime I find a machine with Solaris on it I want to format it too.

lol, nice. Didn't Solaris develop XFS?

That would be Sun, and no they didn't. SGI did. For Irix.

 

[DaiShan]

Drag, have you ever used proftpd? Extremely easy to set up (I mean extremely) and it supports chrooted environments. I've never fooled around with the TLS features as I just use an ssh tunnel to secure my traffic (port 21 isn't even open at the firewall)

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: Rilex

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Rilex
IIS is still even more simple than that -- the service is started for you

Icky. Starting a critical and often vulnerable service should require some knowledge. And IIS shouldn't be starting by default on all Windows installs. That's just scary.

Since deploying a firewall is part of "best practice", if IIS needs to be patched or further configured, you just don't open the port in the firewall until you're ready. Either that or deploy Service Packs (e.g. XP SP2 or 2003 SP1) before loading IIS so it is patched "out of the box" from the past major worm issues (only applies to IIS5...).

Then they haven't done enough research into the platform.

Like I said, some people are CLI challeneged. Microsoft does make it easier, there is no denying that.

So does a number of Linux distros that are tailored towards the CLI impaired, and I think it's a retarded idea on either platform.
Someone who doesn't know what he's doing has no business setting up a production webserver, be it Linux, Windows, or any other OS, period, end of.

Fixed. After all we all have to learn somewhere. I think I was 13 or so what I started fooling with apache, sans ipchains (or any type of firewall for that matter) I didn't even know enough at the time to check if I'd been owned. Of course 13 year olds also don't run mission critical web servers for companies, so all I lost was time.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Rilex
Since deploying a firewall is part of "best practice", if IIS needs to be patched or further configured, you just don't open the port in the firewall until you're ready. Either that or deploy Service Packs (e.g. XP SP2 or 2003 SP1) before loading IIS so it is patched "out of the box" from the past major worm issues (only applies to IIS5...).

Are we talking about best practices following admins or newbies? I'm confused.

Like I said, some people are CLI challeneged. Microsoft does make it easier, there is no denying that.

I can deny it constantly and truthfully. Microsoft does not make "it" easier. For me.

You just have to learn their terminology. I admin both *nix and Windows servers, and it took some getting used to when I started with the Windows boxes, but once you figure things out you don't even have to be able to read really, just click on the right picture. Of course conf files still make more sense to me but meh.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Drag, have you ever used proftpd? Extremely easy to set up (I mean extremely) and it supports chrooted environments. I've never fooled around with the TLS features as I just use an ssh tunnel to secure my traffic (port 21 isn't even open at the firewall)

Ya, but nowadays I just use sftp. But that's only for me personally.

If I had to deal with a lot of people accessing the server then giving them all a account to use ssh probably wouldn't be a good idea.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Fixed. After all we all have to learn somewhere. I think I was 13 or so what I started fooling with apache, sans ipchains (or any type of firewall for that matter) I didn't even know enough at the time to check if I'd been owned. Of course 13 year olds also don't run mission critical web servers for companies, so all I lost was time.

I sorta disagree still.
To use a cliche, it's a brave new world out there, back in the day when the web was new and far more useful, the only one who would lose anything by getting his server rooted was you.
These days, some script kiddie is as likely to use your home trying-to-learn-linux server to attack my new-age-.com-e-business-very-production-webserver as he's likely to just screw with you.

Same as people saying "Why should I care about antivirus or firewalls? I have nothing important on my computer".
They're right, except their compromised computer may very well be attacking Yahoo, some bank, or just some poor schmuck trying to surf some porn.

Of course, we have to learn somewhere, but spending some time to read at least some basic documentation is a must, no matter what.
Microsoft, Suse, etc, are discouraging this by giving the illusion of the easy to administer even for your dad server, while the old conventional wisdom that a server is only as seure as it's admin is as true as ever.