|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] Server h/w migration?
|
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 01:04:51 -0400
> From: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 09:29:45PM -0400, JP Vossen wrote:
>> Looking for advice or best practices here. I will be migrating
>> several personal servers to new hardware over the next few months.
What I'm really looking for is high-level outlines of methods to do the
move, as per my examples...
> If you just copy your configuration and data from one computer to
> another (or several), I think you're wasting an opportunity to
> simplify and improve your setup.
>
> You should start by making a through backup. Then get rid of
> everything you don't need -- packages, daemons, configuration
> files, data, and programs and libraries in /usr/local. [...]
All (including snipped) good advice. But I have a couple of
contraindications for some of it. First, my Debian installs are
*minimal* [1], to which I've added only the necessary packages. With
one exception, all servers are purpose-built and have stayed that way.
So I'm sure there is very little fat, and what there is is just not
worth the extra time and effort to remove. (This would not be true of
some of my workstations, but they aren't at issue.) The exception to
this is my main services server, which not only has some extra fat, but
has many years worth of data (we're talking back to COBOL programs from
college :). However, I'm a pack-rat, so... :-)
> dpkg --get-selections | grep '\<install$'
I use 'dpkg-query --show'
> find /etc
I keep /etc in Subversion, and stay reasonably on top of it.
> find /home
LOL, on my main server that one would certainly kill me!
> You'll know you're done when you get the same satisfaction that
> follows a serious housecleaning.
I'll get that from consistent H/W, far less clutter in my server room
and rack, and neatly run and wrapped cabling (for a while anyway).
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:47:02 -0400
> From: brent saner <brent.saner@gmail.com>
JP Vossen wrote:
>> Destination OS is 3 Debian Etch and 1 Ubuntu Hardy.
>
> just a quick note. debian is, um... well, notorious for not supporting
> newer hardware. or even new hardware.
I will be *shocked* if Debian can't handle circa 2004 Dell PE750s. But
now that you've got me thinking about it...
<Goes and checks.> OK, I just did a Debian Etch Net Install from a CD
burned 2007-05-28 and it worked like a champ. Guided then tweaked full
disk LVM, minimal, came right up... (Even with the server in the rack
upside down, since I wasn't paying attention... :)
> or even older newer hardware. hell, it doesn't do a very good job of a
> lot of hardware support.
I've run into that before, which is why my Wife's VMWare host is running
Ubuntu 6.06, not Debian Etch. In retrospect Ubuntu was the right answer
anyway, but at the time it worked with her Dell desktop's SATA drive/MB
and Debian didn't.
> don't get me wrong, i love looooove debian, but the stable branch is a
> little..well, a little TOO stable.
> i'd go with lenny and just keep on top of updates.
Not for my servers it isn't! I just set up an Ubuntu server for
PANTUG.org and I ran into far too many glitches for my taste. They were
trivial, sure, but once you get past the hardware and quite old versions
of certain things (e.g. PHP, MySQL), Debian Just Works. Forever.
Period. That's what I'm looking for a in a server. If I wanted to run
Lenny beta on a server, I'd run Ubuntu server. :-)
Having said all that, I get your point, but in my case I'm aware of the
issues and have made an informed decision. Mostly...
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:18:52 -0400
> From: "Chad Waters" <chad@chadwaters.com>
>
> They're actually going to update hw support in Etch 4.0r4 (codename
> "Etch and a Half")
> http://wiki.debian.org/EtchAndAHalf
> http://wiki.debian.org/EtchAndAHalf/ReleaseNotes
Now *that* I didn't know. If I run into h/w issues I'll try it, but it
works for the intended H/W as I just tested it.
Thanks for the thoughts so far,
JP
[1] Debian understand what "minimal" means, unlike Red Hat, to whole it
means tens or hundreds of unnecessary packages, "just in case."
----------------------------|:::======|-------------------------------
JP Vossen, CISSP |:::======| jp{at}jpsdomain{dot}org
My Account, My Opinions |=========| http://www.jpsdomain.org/
----------------------------|=========|-------------------------------
"Microsoft Tax" = the additional hardware & yearly fees for the add-on
software required to protect Windows from its own poorly designed and
implemented self, while the overhead incidentally flattens Moore's Law.
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|