Re: 64 bit server
From: Yeah Right (Yeah.Right_at_Guess.not)
Date: 02/13/05
- Next message: Liam Slider: "Re: OsX compared to Linux and BeOS"
- Previous message: wcb: "Re: OsX compared to Linux and BeOS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:40:35 GMT
General Schvantzkoph wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:57:01 +0000, Mike Brearley wrote:
>
>
>>A small business I do some work for has been using 32bit Windows 2003 and
>>Exchange 2003 (trial editions) for awhile now. They are about to expire and
>>they are unwilling to fork over the money to buy them.
>>
>>The server has an AMD Duron processor and all sata drives.
>>
>>What's my best Linus option for file sharing with Windows desktops and an
>>email server that is easy to migrate to from Exchange 2003 (and if it has
>>similar features that would be nice).
>>
>>Thanks...
>
>
> A Duron is a 32 bit processor, your title is asking about 64 bits. If you
> really want a 64 bit system then you'll need and Athlon64 or an Opteron.
> However the Duron is fine for a file an mail server.
>
> Either Mandrake 10.1 or Fedora Core 3 will do the job for you. Both come
> with everything you need, SAMBA for Windows file sharing, Mail servers,
> Apache Web server, FTP, and SSH. Mandrake has better GUI configuration
> tools than Fedora but Fedora's are pretty good too. In either case I'd
> recommend that you install webmin which is a browser based admistration
> tool. It will make setting up the various servers very easy. You can get
> webmin from http://www.webmin.com/. Mandrake releases are supported
> longer than Fedora because Fedora is Redhat's development platform. If you
> want something that is supported for a very long time (5 years) then you
> should use Redhat Enterprise Linux. RHEL costs money however there is a
> free clone called Whitebox Linux which you can download off of the net.
> Whitebox takes the sources for RHEL that are provided by Redhat, strips
> the Redhat logos so as not to violate Redhat's copyrights (all of the
> actual code is GPLed so it's OK to use that) and generates ISOs. I don't
> know if RHEL/Whitebox will handle SATA drives because it uses an old
> kernel.
>
RHEL 3 Update 3 and above will handle SATA drives. I've tested it.
- Next message: Liam Slider: "Re: OsX compared to Linux and BeOS"
- Previous message: wcb: "Re: OsX compared to Linux and BeOS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
