Slashdot Mirror


New Debian-based Enterprise Linux?

arkanoid.dk writes "Sources close to Progeny, Mandriva and Turbolinux report that a new Enterprise Linux distribution is on its way. Apparently, the distribution will be based on Debian 3.1 Sarge and will form the foundation of the next server distributions from the three companies. The three companies hope that the new distribution will enable them to compete with the market leaders Red Hat and Novell Inc's server distributions. An interesting part is that the new system should support both DEB (Debian package) and RPM (Red Hat Package Management) to enable better cross-compatibility with other Linux flavours. The vendor said: 'It will have a nice, Web-based front end for service management, which Sarge lacks. It's basically oriented toward edge-of-the-network type applications, such as ISP software.'"

26 of 145 comments (clear)

  1. How is this new? by stevenbdjr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've always considered stock Debian stable to be "Enterprise Grade" for a Linux distribution. Between a huge number of architectures, excellent package management, and great security team, it's my first choice for a server distribution.

    Also, Debian has had "RPM compatibility" in the form of Alien for quite some time.

    1. Re:How is this new? by Meshach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What the actual article is about is how Debian, Mandrake, and some other vendors are joining forces ot create a new enterprise solution.

      It really has nothing to do with the package management choice as the summary suggests

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    2. Re:How is this new? by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Debian is "Enterprise Grade" if you've spent years with Debian. I honestly don't think I'd be capable of administrating a Debian server, and I've been running Debian-based distros for the past 5 years, yet I know for a fact I can administrate Windows servers (being a previous System Admin) with about the same time frame of experience.

      The problem is how deeply intricate services in Unix are. Everything has to be put in a certain folder. Everything has different runlevels. Everything's got different start up scripts, everything's got their own little special ways of doing everything, and thus, nothing is unified. While I know how to stop and start an SSH daemon, hardware busses, DHCP, and a few other services, I'd be lost if a company told me "okay, install this service and have it up and running by noon.".

      So, this will be a welcome addition; a single panel where I can go to add in any new services at any time I like, remove them, and without having to be too obsessed about runlevels and such. I wanna be able to tell it when (at boot/at login) and how often and what user to run under and be done.

      Sure I'll get a million responses ("oh this is how you do it, it's not hard, blah blah blah"), but that doesn't help; you can tell *me* how to do it, but until you are able to train people how to do it effectively and quickly, I think system admins will continue to shy away from debian (and sadly, Linux for a lot of the same reasoning).

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    3. Re:How is this new? by Burz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, in my experience RedHat/FC is not the place to go for stability. The changes between upgrades are too radical to keep many 3rd-party commercial apps running without expensive upgrades. Once you step outside of their walled garden (going beyond the usual RH-supplied services) then you're asking for trouble.

      From RH 7.1 to 7.3 to 8 to 9 was some of the most harrowing experiences I've had with Linux.

      Transitioning from Debian stable to testing (and following the changes in testing) has allowed myself and others to keep apps working for YEARS longer than we could with RH.

    4. Re:How is this new? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I do not know if Linux needs a new "Enterprise Grade" Linux distribution. A good small office server distribution would be welcome. Way to many small and medium sized companies are using Windows for their server.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:How is this new? by menscher · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Not sure how you got modded "informative" with that troll.

      Here's a hint: The original RedHat linux (version 9) and Fedora Core are not supposed to be used in the enterprise. They have RHEL for that. Which, incidentally, does not change. Patches get backported, which ensures stability.

      If you were really trying to run a production system on Fedora, then you deserve what you got. Which, hopefully, was fired.

    6. Re:How is this new? by Burz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Its less stable as a platform, which is why I said it keeps breaking 3rd party software.

      When you've paid for an office full of VMware 3.2 and Rational Rose in a development environment, its rather off-putting when these apps advertised as RedHat compatible will only run on newer distros that are UN-related to RedHat. Having a workstation with RHEL did not help this problem. In this scenario, VMware required the customer to upgrade their product ($$$) and Rational stopped playing the game and drew the line at RH 7.3.

      Have a nice day :-)

  2. Deb and RPM by HoserHead · · Score: 2, Informative

    Supporting both deb and rpm formats isn't that big a deal - Debian itself supports both, through both rpm itself and alien.

    1. Re:Deb and RPM by jbolden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ubuntu's focus is a consummer desktop. What does that have to do with enterprise servers?

    2. Re:Deb and RPM by Afrosheen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If their focus was really for a consumer desktop, they'd knock off the bullshit with Java, Flash, and other desktop must-haves. They have alot of stuff in their wiki that describes the painful steps you have to take to get things working right.

      Oh and I hope you don't plan on using dvd::rip or other dvd creation tools that require mplayer. Mplayer segfaults all over the place due to an audio bug and the ubuntu devs have done nothing to fix it.

      The kings of the linux desktop will remain Suse, Mandrake and maybe even Fedora until the Ubuntu devs take their distro more seriously. I like it and run it but it's definitely got alot of weirdness they need to work out.

  3. RPM is the only thing the article focuses on? by vansloot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm more interested to find out what kind of administrative tools they would bring to the table. Debian has had RPM support for a while.

  4. Supported hardware? by Krankheit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It disappoints me that distributions that are forked off of Debian often fall short of it by not preserving some of Debians greatest assets, like being the NetBSD of Linux dsitributions so I can run Debian on my x86 desktops, and my PPC Mac Mini. I tried Xandros, which is based off of Debian a while back (not for myself, I was running Slackware back then) and it was okay for x86, but required alot of mucking around just to change the window manager to one that the user preferred. Also, it is x86 only, which is too bad (I know about Ubuntu, but I want one distribution for all desktops if possible, but I don't mind different iteraitons of *BSD on server/router) Lets hope this one will at least support both PPC Macs and x86 PCs.

    --
    Powered by caffeine and sugar; BSD
  5. You know its going to suck when... by ArmorFiend · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A distribution that advertises that it supports multiple packaging formats is telling you two things:

    1) We don't put enough time into our packages to make our package system fully functional.

    2) We, and our users, approach the package system in a hackish way.

    Yes, Debian has 'alien', but they're not really advertising it, nor would I reccomend using it except in extreme circumstances (e.g. no source.tar.gz). That these guys advertise this compatibility speaks very ill about their distro, IMO.

    1. Re:You know its going to suck when... by m50d · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Or maybe they've put the effort in to actually get the two working and compatible?

      It can be done. I'm writing this on a slackware system that uses emerde. I can emerge or use gentoo binary packages for programs, and I can use slackware packages. The two fit together perfectly, the programs update the "database" of each packaging system from the other one. Although it would be harder with the more complex rpm and deb, I don't think it's impossible.

      --
      I am trolling
  6. What about Oracle certification? by cduffy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason my employer is spending big bucks on enterprise Linux (well, not quite so big now that we switched to SLES9) is simple: Oracle (the company, not the product) supports RHEL or SLES, and nothing else. Sure, we could run our databases on Gentoo if we wanted -- it works fine in practice -- but Oracle's terms prohibit that in a production environment, and we'd rather like to continue being able to use the expensive support we're paying for.

    If these folks get Oracle certification, I'll be thrilled to have them in the marketplace. Otherwise, as far as my employer and I are concerned, they're "enterprise" in name alone.

    (Oh -- and if you're considering Oracle, count the extra cost of a certified OS in as part of what you'll be paying for it. That, and the hair loss and headaches).

    1. Re:What about Oracle certification? by LFS.Morpheus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seems like:
      If you're considering Oracle -- don't.

      --
      The space unintentionally left unblank.
    2. Re:What about Oracle certification? by cduffy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Heh.

      There are valid reasons to use Oracle. Those reasons aren't always technical ones, though.

      (There are *certainly* good technical reasons for using a real, enterprise-level DBMS; I'm not disputing that. Further, there are few folks I hold in lower esteem than those willing to use for mission critical work a database developed by folks who once said in public that such features as referential integrity were not worth having).

  7. Another OpenLinux ? by abelikoff · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Am I the only one who feels, this looks like yet another OpenLinux project? Several 2nd and 3rd tier Linux distributors joining together in a futile effort to knock RedHat off it's throne...

    The problem is, each distribution has its own set of goals. Or at least it better have - otherwise there is no reason for it to exist. And while there are different sets of goals, there will always be problems with maintaining a unified base.

    The main problem, however, is that "enterpriseness" of the distribution is not about the choice of package format or a set of packages, or a cute name. It is about support. RHEL per se is not much different from dozens of other distributions on the market. It is the support behind it that makes it so attractive in the eyes of the IT industry. And this is really what any join effoer for another enterprise-ready distribution should be about.

  8. I may just be snarky today (it's hot) but... by smchris · · Score: 4, Funny

    It will have a nice, Web-based front end for service management, which Sarge lacks.

    So the distribution will install Webmin and a range of the modules by _default_? Yipee! I've been waiting for that innovation. NOW I'll be able to use linux!

  9. No commercial support from the software vendor by DexterF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What debian lacks is somebody who is paid for getting called by your PHB or similar and get yelled at. Then eventually fixes something. Imagine going to freenode/#debian and inquiring about IBM DB2 issues you can't handle yourself. When the asbestos cools down your boss wants to know what the support droids said. Your answer?

  10. Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... by g2devi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > And even if they were, is it really such a chore
    > to upgrade every 12 months, when it's Free?

    Yes it is. When they have critical systems that work, they don't want to break it under any circumstance. They don't care about what's new and hip (like geeks, consumers, and programmers like you and me). They just want to get work done and they don't want any surprises.

    Most enterprises prefer a 3-5 year upgrade cycle.Some don't want to upgrade 20 old COBOL code, because it works and an upgrade would mean that you have to restart your QA from ground zero. All software has bugs and limitations, but with new software, you have a new set of bugs and a new of limitations (like new memory requirements or dropping old hardware devices). The key difference is that with the old OS, the limitations and bugs are known and workarounds are documented, while in the new OS they aren't. That's why the Linux 2.0 kernel is *still* being patched with security fixes, even though it was first released in 1997 and is really stale. That's why Windows *2000* is still quite popular in enterprise even though everyone knows that move to XP/2003/Longhorn is inevitable, and why some enterprise software still requires Windows NT.

    If it works and security patches (without new features/bugs) are kept up to date, why should you have to "fix" it? The only thing Debian needs to be enterprise grade is a predictable 3-5 year release cycle (or the willingness to support all versions of Debian for this long.) so that enterprises can plan their upgrades and burn in verification in an orderly fashion. That appears to be what the new Debian president is promising.

    The new "United Linux" group just adds a bit more credibility to that promise.

  11. Emphasis on wrong side by alucinor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article seems to make it sound as if these companies are bringing a lot to Debian, but as many others have pointed out, all these touted enhancements already exist. So really, what the article should emphasize is that these companies are acknowledging they need the support of the Debian world behind them, in order to compete against the strong de-facto corporate standards being set out there by RHEL and SLES. Apparently the LSB alone wasn't strong enough. Whether these companies have anything worthwhile to contribute back to Debian waits to be seen, however. Hopefully they'll be willing to donate resources in the form of either funding or developer time to the foundation if their new distros are successful.

    --
    random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
  12. Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... by pyite · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, and for that matter, can Debian at last quit pissing about how it's the One, True, Honest-To_God Pure, Holy, Sacramental, Big Kahuna Free Software Linux and everybody else is shit, now that they're going enterprise?

    Be careful with your pronouns. I'm not sure who you mean by "their" as your statement implies that the Debian organization is going enterprise. This just simply isn't the case. The article speaks of a "trio of companies," not the Debian organization. This sort of makes your point moot, because Debian's official releases can continue to reject software that has licensing terms that don't mesh with Debian and people packaging their own distros, enterprise or not, can continue to roll in whatever they want. In any event, no one forces you to use Debian. If you think apt/deb is broken, you're entitled to that opinion.

    --

    "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

  13. You know someone hasn't read the article when... by LibrePensador · · Score: 3, Informative

    he complains about something that isn't actually raised. Mandrake is not going to be using alien, neither is Debian. They are both going to be using a new package tool, called SmartPM. Google for it.

    The tool is able to use debian and rpm repositories natively. It also does a lot of good things that no other tool, yum, apt or urpmi currently does. The people doing the research for it are current and former apt and urpmi developers and they have done their homework.

    So, stop spreading misinformation about something which you have not taken the time to understand.

    --
    Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
  14. Your dreams have come true! by Anonymous+Cumshot · · Score: 3, Funny
    lesbian linux is alive and well. From their website:

    Lesbian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer. An operating system is the set of basic programs and utilities that make your computer run. Lesbian uses the Linux kernel (the core of an operating system), but most of the basic OS tools come from the GNU project; hence the name GNU/Linux.

    Lesbian GNU/Linux provides more than a pure OS: it comes with more than 10000 packages, precompiled software bundled up in a nice format for easy installation on your machine.

    --
    Best regards, A.C.
  15. Apparently you've never heard of Progeny by Xtifr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not only have they been providing commercial support for Debian for years (and providing employment for many Debian developers), but apparently they're doing well enough at it that some fairly decent-sized companies (neither Mandriva nor Turbo is exactly tiny) are interested in teaming up with them.