#291862 - 02/01/2007 12:44
Linux Server Distribution
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
What is the easiest to configure Linux distribution for a home file server? I would need to access it via OSX (usually) and XP (occasionally).
On a side note, what is the best distribution to use for fun using Parallels in OSX?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291863 - 02/01/2007 12:58
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
What is the easiest to configure Linux distribution for a home file server?
Ubuntu.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291864 - 02/01/2007 13:21
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: Roger]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291865 - 02/01/2007 13:27
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
|
Quote:
On a side note, what is the best distribution to use for fun using Parallels in OSX?
Depending on quite what your idea of fun is, Linux From Scratch? Otherwise Ubuntu again, which I agree with Roger is the answer to your first question.
Peter
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291866 - 02/01/2007 13:33
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: peter]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Just to play around with a little. Something reasonably functional from a GUI standpoint but drill down later.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291867 - 02/01/2007 13:38
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 17/01/2002
Posts: 3996
Loc: Manchester UK
|
I prefer Kubuntu as I like KDE over Gnome. As for fun, I'd recommend Gentoo, not quite as tasking as LFS but still very involving. I learnt everything I know about linux (some would say that isn't very much  ) from installing and using Gentoo. How are you finding Parallels? It was the first thing I put on my new MbP, certainly good enough for the occaisional jump over to Visio and checking windows builds of my projects. I've also downloaded the beta of the vmware for OSX which certainly works but is running dog slow because debugging is enabled.
_________________________
Cheers,
Andy M
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291868 - 02/01/2007 13:45
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: andym]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Parallels is good. The USB support needs vast improvement though. OSX is grabbing USB devices (sometimes) and will not let the guest OS access the device. Reports it in use by another application. So far, I've not figured out how to force OSX to leave the device alone.
I have XP and Vista (RC1) running in it. The Vista support is a little sketchy. Looked like a simple way to mess around with Linux.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291869 - 02/01/2007 20:13
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: andym]
|
old hand
Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
|
Quote:
How are you finding Parallels?
I've been running the Beta versions of Parallels since the first one appeared. The latest one is Beta 3, and you can get it here.
They seem to be much improved over what I was using earlier. It runs both XP and Ubuntu really quite fast on my Macbook, USB Support works well (have you tried the beta, blitz?), and it can boot from the Boot Camp partition which is very neat. The Coherence mode in XP is just taking it all to the next level with Windows apps and Start Menu on the OSX desktop, drag and drop files and shared clipboards between operating systems. Beta 3 is absolutely stable for me. It is definitely the most impressive piece of software on my Mac.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291870 - 03/01/2007 14:50
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: sein]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
I have not tried the Parallels Beta. I agree Parallels is an unbelievable piece of software. I will try the Beta tonight. Thanks for the link.
Another question on Ubuntu. On their site they have the new 3.10. When you go to the download for the server, the image is actually the desktop image. Are they the same in that distribution?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291871 - 03/01/2007 16:28
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
I have not tried the Parallels Beta. I agree Parallels is an unbelievable piece of software. I will try the Beta tonight. Thanks for the link.
Another question on Ubuntu. On their site they have the new 3.10.
6.10 ?
Quote:
When you go to the download for the server, the image is actually the desktop image. Are they the same in that distribution?
No, slightly different images which simply contain different groups of packages. You probably want the desktop version, to which you can then just point-and-click to add any extra server stuff using "synaptic".
-ml
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291872 - 03/01/2007 18:15
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: mlord]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
6.10 is correct. Thanks for you help. The one puzzling thing is the installation appears tol not recognize the hardware raid5. It wants me to individually partition each drive. Any ideas?
Edited by blitz (03/01/2007 18:22)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291873 - 03/01/2007 22:05
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
6.10 is correct. Thanks for you help. The one puzzling thing is the installation appears tol not recognize the hardware raid5. It wants me to individually partition each drive. Any ideas?
There should be an option somewhere for that. If it sees individual drives, then it's probably not true hardware RAID in the first place.
Cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291874 - 03/01/2007 23:25
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: mlord]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Quote:
There should be an option somewhere for that. If it sees individual drives, then it's probably not true hardware RAID in the first place
It is possible it's not true hardware RAID but the spec sheet on the board says Intel ICH7R with Software RAID 0,1,10,5. There is an Intel Bios Setup for the RAID which is straightforward enough.
I went ahead and set up Ubuntu 6.10 after the RAID setup and installed on the first disk. But it would not but with the RAID enabled in the BIOS. Once I disabled that, it booted to the single disk.
Question. I recall there might be a way to setup using Ubuntu for a software RAID which is plenty OK for me. Will that work and bypass the Intel RAID?
It is definitely seeing the individual drives on install.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291875 - 04/01/2007 01:39
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
Question. I recall there might be a way to setup using Ubuntu for a software RAID which is plenty OK for me. Will that work and bypass the Intel RAID?
Yes, this all should be doable. But I haven't done it recently, and don't know the exact semantics to tell Ubuntu to do it. It probably just requires typing "linux expert" at the CD boot line or something prior to install.
There's probably even a compatibility mode where Linux will recognise the BIOS RAID headers, though I don't know if the Ubuntu kernels have that feature yet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291876 - 04/01/2007 02:19
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: mlord]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Quote:
There's probably even a compatibility mode where Linux will recognise the BIOS RAID headers, though I don't know if the Ubuntu kernels have that feature yet.
Found this. http://www.ubuntu-in.org/wiki/SATA_RAID_Howto
Edit: fixed bad URL -wfaulk
Edited by wfaulk (04/01/2007 12:46)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291877 - 05/01/2007 15:13
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
addict
Registered: 13/06/2000
Posts: 429
Loc: Berlin, DE
|
I would suggest not using the motherboard RAID setup. I use all linux software raid on my servers. It works very well, and is safer because you arn't dependent on a specific motherboard or controller card.
The way I setup my system is this:
1GB mirror raid for root filesystem
(optional) 10-20GB mirror raid for OS filesystems (usr/var/tmp/)
Raid5 for the rest of the disk for /home
software raid is great because you can divide up disks into several raid sets, instead of having to do one type of raid for the whole disk.
_________________________
80gig red mk2 -- 080000125
(No, I don't actually hate Alan Cox)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291878 - 06/01/2007 02:43
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: SuperQ]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Thanks for the advice. That's kind of where I've been headed in the last day or so. It looks a lot more flexible and straightforward from the distributions I've seen.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291879 - 06/01/2007 12:39
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
The Myth box here is our most recently set-up system with RAID.
It has two 300GB drives, each of which has a small 8GB partition, and a huge 292GB partition.
The first drive hold the 8GB root partition (bootable non-RAID), and the second drive holds the 8GB swap partition (non-RAID). The two BIG partitions are then combined with RAID0 to give the box about 584GB of fast storage space for recordings.
No redundancy in this one -- I don't care too much about losing TV recordings. The RAID0 was more important because the box needs the I/O bandwidth to handle simultaneous recording of up to two HD 1080i streams along with two analog streams, while doing playback of another HD 1080i stream.
CPU never gets busy, but the hard drives sure do.
Cheers
Edited by mlord (06/01/2007 12:41)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291880 - 06/01/2007 14:51
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: mlord]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Quote:
The Myth box here is ... simultaneous recording of up to two HD 1080i streams along with two analog streams, while doing playback of another HD 1080i stream.
Cheers
What's your source for the 1080i video stream? External Box? How are you capturing the signal (card)?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291881 - 06/01/2007 18:31
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: blitz]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14491
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
The Myth box here is ... simultaneous recording of up to two HD 1080i streams along with two analog streams, while doing playback of another HD 1080i stream.
Cheers
What's your source for the 1080i video stream? External Box? How are you capturing the signal (card)?
The source is "over the air" broadcast television (no monthly cable/satellite fees for us). The capture device is an HDHomeRun networked dual-ATSC receiver, connected to the Myth box via 100mb/s ethernet. I *really* like this device. It apparently can also tune (unencrypted) digital cable channels.
It just streams the selected HDTV channels as MPEG to whatever app wants to play/save them.
Cheers
Edited by mlord (06/01/2007 18:35)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291882 - 06/01/2007 18:47
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
Quote:
The Myth box here is our most recently set-up system with RAID.
It has two 300GB drives, each of which has a small 8GB partition, and a huge 292GB partition.
This is a good idea in general with software raid. Try not to use the entire disk up, so that when it comes time to replace a failed disk, you don't have issues with a replacement disk offering slightly less space. IE, the Seagate 300GB drive offers 284GB of usable space, while the Maxtor 300GB may only offers 283GB of usable space. For my Linux server, I always created the partitions then told the raid side to use those, over using the entire disk. Another advantage of software raid is the usable space on larger drives. I added a 500gb drive to my server a few months back, and used 160gb of it to add to my raid 5. The rest of the space I have shared out for storing large system backups from my machines, backups that don't need raid protection since they are already the second copy of the data.
HP's storage group requests that custom firmware be put on the drives they buy from vendors to equalize this, so that any 250GB disk has the exact same usable space, no matter who the vendor is. It ends up helping later too, since vendors may even change the disk to a newer model later with a different amount of usable space.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#291883 - 10/01/2007 12:16
Re: Linux Server Distribution
[Re: drakino]
|
addict
Registered: 20/11/2001
Posts: 455
Loc: Texas
|
Well.... I kept my "hardware" RAID setup and got it running under RedHat Core 5. It had direct support under dmraid. So I created a directory and called it "Videos". Now how do I share that to my Apple MacMini which feeds my TV? The idea is to store all these DVDs I have on the server.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index