Setting up small server

[areksnumbr1sxylady]

Hi,

I am a noob in this networking, so please dont shout if I get something wrong, just trying to learn something new, so I wont get ripped off later

If I were to setup lets say 5 computer small business, with similar functions that you see in schools or other businesses... e.g you will need Login and Password to log-in, and software updates can be installed via server pc to all pc`s.

What kind of software would I need to accomplish this?? Is it possible to use Ubuntu free OS and a Ubuntu server? All I am interested is that any person who has an account can sit on any of 5 pc`s and get to their data via login and password.


Thank you

 

[Mr-White]

Does it have to be Ubuntu, would be much easier to just use a Windows server as a domain controller ?

MW

 

[memyselfandi]

Personally I wouldn't use Ubuntu in a commercial environment ... not enough regression testing for patches and lifespan of some releases being to short. If you want something free then use CentOS so at least you know that it's just a debranded commercial Linux OS.

But in a business environment you need to consider whether you are implementing something that is actually supportable and the cost to the business if it breaks and the system is unavailable until it's fixed. It might well be cheaper to use a Windows server.

 

[bigredshark]

Personally I wouldn't use Ubuntu in a commercial environment ... not enough regression testing for patches and lifespan of some releases being to short. If you want something free then use CentOS so at least you know that it's just a debranded commercial Linux OS.

That's fairly terrible linux advice...

Ubuntu LTS releases are about the best long term linux implementations available today, unlike Redhat they actually have some resemblance to current software versions (If you want up to date PHP versions etc Ubuntu is a much better bet) and have 5 years of support for LTS releases.

As for CentOS, well it's no longer in sync enough with RHEL to matter much and as a project is still riven with devisions which should scare anybody relying on it commercially silly. Whereas Ubuntu is pretty solid under Canonical and you have the option of purchasing support and the excellent landscape system manager.

If you need support for CentOS you have nobody official to turn to, the fact it's rebranded RHEL won't help you much then. If you want support for Ubuntu you pay them and they help you.

That said, if you've got no experience and don't fancy paying a consultant a lot of money to do it properly then you'd be better going for a Windows based domain. You'll have to cough up licensing and you might need to cough up for somebody to set it up properly if you don't have experience.

 

[memyselfandi]

That's fairly terrible linux advice...

Ubuntu LTS releases are about the best long term linux implementations available today, unlike Redhat they actually have some resemblance to current software versions (If you want up to date PHP versions etc Ubuntu is a much better bet) and have 5 years of support for LTS releases.

As for CentOS, well it's no longer in sync enough with RHEL to matter much and as a project is still riven with devisions which should scare anybody relying on it commercially silly. Whereas Ubuntu is pretty solid under Canonical and you have the option of purchasing support and the excellent landscape system manager.

If you need support for CentOS you have nobody official to turn to, the fact it's rebranded RHEL won't help you much then. If you want support for Ubuntu you pay them and they help you.

That said, if you've got no experience and don't fancy paying a consultant a lot of money to do it properly then you'd be better going for a Windows based domain. You'll have to cough up licensing and you might need to cough up for somebody to set it up properly if you don't have experience.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you at all. Ubuntu is basically garbage for use in a commercial environment, use it as a personal desktop fine but anything sever related just no. I know way to many people which have had issues with problems being introduced by insufficient testing of patch releases, or APIs/ABIs being changed due to package upgrades during the lifecycle of the release. Even the LTS versions have proved to be problematic enough that we no longer approve solutions using them.

We have many RHEL servers and also use CentOS for some non-critical, non-customer facing services ... I can't say that we've found any large discrepancies between the releases. Of course if the OP wants to go for a full blown commercially supported Linux OS then they should go with RHEL or SLES with a support contract but that would probably be a lot more expensive than they appeared to want to pay.

But I do agree with your last point, if they don't have the knowledge to be confident that they an set this up and more importantly be able to support it in an ongoing manner then they should probably consider just going with a Windows solution.

 

[Clav]

If the 5 Pc's are to be running Windows then you are better off with a full Windows environment imo. For simplicities sake if nothing else. However, setting up a proper domain with WSUS, with the associated configuration headaches and with the licensing costs just doesn't really seem worth it for 5 PC's.

On that scale you would be better off with a simple workgroup, a fileserver of some sort for central storage and a backup solution.

 

[Cycrow]

If it was me, i would use FreeBSD or Debian over Ubuntu/CentOS for the Server. Then you could use Ubuntu for the workstations

The main question would be what is the intended use of this network, what software will be running on the workstations, etc