ike at lesmuug.org
Mon May 31 23:39:46 EDT 2004
sorry to send again- forgot to cc to the list.
On May 29, 2004, at 5:35 PM, Harold Bush wrote:
> I need some help making a decision. I'm moving my hosting clients from
> a rented server in Atlanta to a location near my office where a
> friend and I are sharing a T1 (Wodstock NY). I have a few questions. I
> will be providing web host/mail service for about 30 clients and am
> wondering whether to use FreeBSD 4.10 or 5.2.1. The goal is to provide
> a stable hosting situation that will not require a lot of work once
For a web server you wish not to become painful or surprising:
I'd DEFINATELY suggest going 4.10, (or 4.9 even, but 4.10 is indeed the
current production release at the time of this writing).
With FreeBSD, it is best practice (and simply sane) to heed these
words: DO NOT attempt to use anything but a Production release for
Production systems, unless you specifically know what your doing and
have the time/energy/economics to deal with the blood which can spill
on the cutting edge.
Also, the FreeBSD cvsup system enables you to elegantly compile a full
system upgrade in a given system, so a future of the 5.3 FreeBSD, (the
first *gulp* production 5.x release) will be a snap when the time
> I intend to use Apache and Postfix and some web mail front end not yet
> determined (suggestions?).
Apache, rocks. Stick to the 1.3.x branch instead of the 2.x branch,
for the same general reasons I suggested above re. FreeBSD 5.x, though
the details are much more involved.
Re. MTA's, Postfix is popular and lots of documentation out there, Exim
is also popular- both great MTA's (but that's not my specialty, so
worth asking around).
> On page 70 of Greg Lehey's book "The Complete FreeBSD" he states:
> ... I now recommend:
> Make a single root file system
> Do not have a seaparate /usr file system
> Do not have a separate /var file system unless you have a good idea
> how big it should be. A good example may be a web server, where
> (contrary to FreeBSD's recommendations) it is a good idea to put the
> web pages on the var file system
Well, if this is your first Unix box in some time, and your going to be
feeling it all out, I'd highly suggest making a single root filesystem
(for example, what if you end up storing your website somewhere in
> This is a little confusing to me (I haven't done any Unix work since
> 95). Can someone recommend a file structure that will support web
> hosting and mail serving that is a known good configuration (in
I'll leave the rest of this to the list for lack of time here- and
since I just suggested not to setup a complex partition scheme until
you have figured out your individual usage patterns for your system.
> Harold Bush
> digitalBRANDS ™
More information about the talk