5 ms·

Ask HN: RHEL based or Debian based?

11 points by tesmar2 14y ago

Over the years I have worked with both systems and I generally prefer RHEL based systems, mainly due to familiarity. HN, what are the pros/cons to working with either system?

noonespecial 14y ago
I use Centos on servers. I've always found the Redhat model to be easier to manage servers with. I use debian on embedded systems because it can more easily be made read-only and smaller. Debian is more "Linux-y". Redhat makes lots of changes to the kernel and filesystem layout that make tinkering with the low level system harder.
ishbits 14y ago
I also use CentOS on servers. It just feels more solid to me, but this is probably more me than it. I also use Fedora on the desktop so I have a consistent package management experience. Even if I switched to Ubuntu/Debian on the desktop, I'd probably keep CentOS on the servers. While its packages may be old, most things still compile on it. A long long time ago I took a preference to RedHat/Fedora (well, pre-Fedora) as more software compiled by default on it than on Debian/Ubuntu. I did once venture over to Ubuntu with the promise of clean upgrades from release to release. In truth, it was no better than Fedora, and I found issues hard to fix.
rushabh 14y ago
We just installed a new machine with the new Luna desktop from elementary os [1]. Looks awesome so far. Might just tilt the balance in favour of Debian on the desktop. [1] http://elementary.org http://elementary.org
- ishbits 14y ago
  The correct URL is: http://elementaryos.org/ http://elementaryos.org/
amalag 14y ago
In my experience CentOS/Redhat is always a pain in the ass. I find Ubuntu/Debian awesome primarily because of the package management.
FireBeyond 14y ago
I went for years as a RHEL/Centos guy, but over time I've become frustrated with the age of packages supplied. I know there are "solutions", in the form of the EPEL repository, RPMForge and the like, but in the end, they become a stopgap, and lead to all manner of issues with dependencies. I've recently grown pretty enamored with Ubuntu 12, and the ease of package management. For me, the growing integration with LXC (which I love for the benefit of "light" VMs / isolation) is becoming buttery smooth. Support has always been a question, but in 8 years of experience with approximately 50+ servers at multiple locations and clients, I've not once needed to contact RedHat.
- csense 14y ago
  I agree. Sometimes you simply must have recent versions of certain packages, and it's much likelier that you'll be able to do that out-of-the-box on Debian/Ubuntu.
doug4hn 14y ago
A quick search of Dice dot com reveals the following: Red Hat - 991 RedHat - 769 CentOS - 383 RHEL - 350 Ubuntu - 250 Debian - 125 I love Ubuntu on my personal laptop, but RHEL, CentOS, and Fedora are what I've used at work most.
pestaa 14y ago
I prefer Arch Linux, it's closest to FreeBSD in spirit but still running on Linux kernel for compatibility reasons.

11 points by tesmar2 14y ago

Over the years I have worked with both systems and I generally prefer RHEL based systems, mainly due to familiarity. HN, what are the pros/cons to working with either system?

noonespecial 14y ago

I use Centos on servers. I've always found the Redhat model to be easier to manage servers with. I use debian on embedded systems because it can more easily be made read-only and smaller. Debian is more "Linux-y". Redhat makes lots of changes to the kernel and filesystem layout that make tinkering with the low level system harder.

ishbits 14y ago

I also use CentOS on servers. It just feels more solid to me, but this is probably more me than it. I also use Fedora on the desktop so I have a consistent package management experience. Even if I switched to Ubuntu/Debian on the desktop, I'd probably keep CentOS on the servers. While its packages may be old, most things still compile on it. A long long time ago I took a preference to RedHat/Fedora (well, pre-Fedora) as more software compiled by default on it than on Debian/Ubuntu. I did once venture over to Ubuntu with the promise of clean upgrades from release to release. In truth, it was no better than Fedora, and I found issues hard to fix.

rushabh 14y ago

We just installed a new machine with the new Luna desktop from elementary os [1]. Looks awesome so far. Might just tilt the balance in favour of Debian on the desktop. [1] http://elementary.org http://elementary.org

ishbits 14y ago
The correct URL is: http://elementaryos.org/ http://elementaryos.org/

amalag 14y ago

In my experience CentOS/Redhat is always a pain in the ass. I find Ubuntu/Debian awesome primarily because of the package management.

FireBeyond 14y ago

I went for years as a RHEL/Centos guy, but over time I've become frustrated with the age of packages supplied. I know there are "solutions", in the form of the EPEL repository, RPMForge and the like, but in the end, they become a stopgap, and lead to all manner of issues with dependencies. I've recently grown pretty enamored with Ubuntu 12, and the ease of package management. For me, the growing integration with LXC (which I love for the benefit of "light" VMs / isolation) is becoming buttery smooth. Support has always been a question, but in 8 years of experience with approximately 50+ servers at multiple locations and clients, I've not once needed to contact RedHat.

csense 14y ago
I agree. Sometimes you simply must have recent versions of certain packages, and it's much likelier that you'll be able to do that out-of-the-box on Debian/Ubuntu.

doug4hn 14y ago

A quick search of Dice dot com reveals the following: Red Hat - 991 RedHat - 769 CentOS - 383 RHEL - 350 Ubuntu - 250 Debian - 125 I love Ubuntu on my personal laptop, but RHEL, CentOS, and Fedora are what I've used at work most.

pestaa 14y ago

I prefer Arch Linux, it's closest to FreeBSD in spirit but still running on Linux kernel for compatibility reasons.