[nycbug-talk] Help

[mikel king]

Isaac Levy wrote:

> Hi Harold,
>
> sorry to send again- forgot to cc to the list.
>
> On May 29, 2004, at 5:35 PM, Harold Bush wrote:
>
>> Folks
>>
>> 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 installed.
>
>
> 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 comes.
>
Worth noting however that a cvsup from 4.x to 5.x may not attain the 
complete benefits of a straight 5.x install, because of the ifferences 
between UFS and UFS2. Unless you need finegrained ACL support and have 
the latest hyperthreaded cpus then stick with the 4.x release, and wait 
to upgrade to 5.x when you replace the box.

>> 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 /usr/local?)
>
>>
>> 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 
>> general)?
>
>
> 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
>> Technologist
>> digitalBRANDS ?
>
>
> Happy hacking!
>
> Rocket,
> .ike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at lists.nycbug.org
> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/tal
> k

Harold, listen most of us on this list would agree go with the stable 
versions of everything, for your production box, and play with the 
nettech in your lab, especially since you haven't done this in a while. 
The last thing you need when you are getting back into the fold is to 
get that call inthe early am that you money maker has kicked the 
bucket...;-)

So when you say client do you mean sepeate domains or mail accounts or 
what? Taaaaahere are several comercial control panels out there that 
work rath nicely for what you are planning, but they can be pricey...

cheers,
m!