On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 16:47:01 -0400 Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ask List wrote: > > Ask List <askthelist <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > >> We can not seem to come to an agreement on the best operating system to run > > spam assassin. So we have decided to post this question to the mailing list > > so > > we can have other opinions. I realize everyone will have a different > > opinion on > > the subject and some will have none at all, linux is linux and unix is > > unix. So > > I would like to hear users experiences using different operating systems. > > Pros/Cons/Problems/Headaches/etc. The operating systems I'm most interested > > in > > are Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, Slackware, FreeBSDs, and OpenSolaris. > > > > I see RedhatEL,Fedora,CentOS is a common theme. Anyone not running a RedHat > > based distribution > > > > > > I'm mostly RH/Fed/Cent and OpenBSD. > > That said, I can give some subjective commentary on the non-redhat's your > looking at. > > Note that anything I comment on that I've never used, or haven't used recently > is purely subjective opinion based on watching the communities. Take them > with a > huge grain of salt. > > Overall the most important thing about a distro is that it fit your personal > style of administration. Some folks prefer source patching compiling, some > abhor > it and want a binary-package auto-updater. Some want a nice minimal text-only > headless server and prefer text-editing config files. Others want the latest > gnome/kde desktop and want GUI config tools. Keep this all in mind and realize > my opinions may vary greatly from yours due to MY preferences being different > from yours. > > > Debian - Never used it. Debian seems to make a pretty reasonable server > product. > They have a highly conservative patch release process for stable releases. > This > is perhaps a bit too conservative for my own tastes, but it is valuable in a > server environment at times. Debian is more strict about the openness of > licenses for packages they distribute than most other distros. In some cases > this strictness takes out some "whiz-bang" tools, but it also keeps you > relatively free from licensing land mines. If you need a whiz-bang, you can > always add it from source. > > Ubuntu - Never used it. However, being Debian based, SOME of the above > applies. > I get the impression that Ubuntu tries to be more "full featured" than > standard > Debian, compared with Debians more minimalist approach. > > Gentoo - I find this distro makes a GREAT developer/test box. However, its > lengthy setup and "build as you go" model doesn't make well suited for server > environments. If your choice of compiler options doesn't work with a > particular > package then your run of emerge can get to be a painful mess. However, this > same > model gives you ultimate flexibility, which is great on a devel box.
We use Gentoo on our production servers. Our mailgateways with exim, spamassassin and clamav and our mailserver (Communigate). It works well. However it's true that it is very time consuming and that you easily mess up your system if you are not careful. Gentoo has a great online documentation (http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/index.xml) Regards, Claudia
