Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => Applications => Topic started by: evilc0re on 8 April 2002, 06:52
-
Okay ive made the switch to linux due to this site...i have been comming here for a while and now proud to say im a linux junkie...One thing with so many linux packages out there i have only a few i really enjoy...but cant seem to find one worth a crap to run a webserver with....any suggestions??
-
i have really do not have a single clue about webservers.
all i know is that apache is a webserver you can run on linux ....
Penguin Power!
-
Apache is the most used webserver in the world.
goto www.netcraft.com (http://www.netcraft.com) and see there survey.
www.apache.org (http://www.apache.org) - Its the best, i use it on my LAN...
Most distro's ship with it...
Im getting cable in a few months and i'm
going to have a webserver. If you have idea's for me
too host just PM me, except for goosenbury, i blocked u.
Im hopeing to have a "l337 Private forum, where only
the inteligent people on here (and other forums)
get let in. People like:
Myself, Calum, Voidman, F00Bar, the webmaster and more. Thats my way to keep out lamers.
-
I opt for running Freebsd for your webserver.
Although, any Linux will work just as well. Apache is pretty easy to setup and use. In Redhat, the easiest way is to download the apache rpms.
It will install by default in /etc/httpd. The config file is in the conf directory titled httpd.conf. The startup script is in /etc/rc.d/init.d. To start/stop the server you can type in /etc/rc.d/init.d/httpd stop or start or restart.
The httpd.conf file is documented pretty well for helping you to configure it. After you've customized it, you're ready to go.
-
Im not sure if you are asking which webserver software to use, or which OS to run your webserver software off of. For the OS, I'd suggest any flavor of *nix, including Solaris, the BSD's, and linux. For the server software, there is of course Apache, but also Zeus, thttpd, iPlanet, Netscape Enterprise, and many more. It all depends on your budget and the size of your project.
-
apche kicks ass! except i havent actually got it working on my computer yet on RH7.2. I am gonna try to use slackware to run apache on my computer.
-
I have never had Apache *not* work right out of the box with no configuration tweaks at all on any RedHat distro. I can't imagine what problem you might be having. I would be more than happy to fix it for you.
-
Even if it's not on a particular distro, I've never had a single problem getting a basic Apache installation working.
If you absolutely must install it on a Windows machine (and that's still better that using IIS) it's as easy as double-clicking the installation program, and them setting the service to run automatically.
However, on a real OS (BSD, OSX, Linux, Solaris etc) it's almost as easy.
Download httpd-2.0.3x.tar.gz to /usr/local/src/
From that dir, tar zxvf httpd-2.0.3x.tar.gz, cd httpd-2.0.3x
./configure && make && make install
...and then all you should need to do is run /usr/local/apache2/bin/apachectl start
... to run the server. All your html docs should be in /usr/local/apache2/htdocs/
If you have any problems after that it's most likely your firewall. Try using Lynx to get to your local httpd server to check this.
-
And it's even easier than that on RedHat. Just check the box at install time and the first time you boot up the sytem it's up and running. And if you didn't install it at OS install time it's just a few simple RPMS to install (1 if you don't want PHP or any of the other good stuff).
And good job on converting your M$ buddy! Hopefully he will act as a virus and infect his other M$ buddies.
-
The problem I find with the canned apache httpd that comes with any distribution is that since you didnt compile it you have to figure out how they did in order to use it. I always prefer to build it myself, that way you know all the compile time options and everything is ass you would like it.
Plus I think you learn more about apache by building it yourself and agonize over all those options. :D
-
I used to always compile my own but for at least the last year I've found that the RPMS or more than suitable for me in "most" situations. It certainly is nice being able to roll your own though if need be, unlike proprietary web servers.
-
installing in slackware is quite simple using the package manager. (i think i am gonna switch my server to slackware soon.)
-
You could try FreeBSD or Debian. Maybe even TurboLinux on your webserver!
-
And What About QNX HTTP server?
I've tried their demo disk and it works pretty well. I've not tried Yet the full OS, but I'm downloading the CD image and I plan to install it soon.
quote:
Originally posted by X11:
You could try FreeBSD or Debian. Maybe even TurboLinux on your webserver!
-
someone go to and see if it works.
[ May 30, 2002: Message edited by: Master of Reality ]
-
quote:
Server Error
The following error occurred:
The client could not connect.
Please contact the administrator.
is what i got from chatroom.fuckmicrosoft.com at 22:49 GMT 30 May 2002
-
damn... i thought i had it working.
-
Don't listen to these guys. Windows 2000 is the ideal platform for your business desktops, laptops, and servers of all sizes. Learning the ins and outs of Apache is a waste of time as it has no relevence in the business world, and it cannot compare to the scalable and supported solutions from Microsoft. Remember, Linux is only free if your time means nothing. Windows 2000 and IIS are a dream to work with compared to the half-assed Linux offerings.
Why Windows 2000 is a Great Web Server (http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/evaluation/features/webserver.asp)
Why Migrate From UNIX and Linux to Windows 2000 (http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/migrate/)
quote:
The big question for many UNIX IT professionals and developers is "Why would I move from UNIX to Windows?" UNIX is well established in the enterprise computing space and applications currently deployed on UNIX may be running just fine in their organization. Linux has arrived on the scene and may appear to be a viable alternative for low-end UNIX systems.
Despite this, many organizations are migrating from UNIX to the Windows platform. They are moving in order to gain better business value, a greater choice of solutions, and richer capabilities for addressing their enterprise computing needs and abilities.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:
Don't listen to these guys. Windows 2000 is the ideal platform for your business desktops, laptops, and servers of all sizes. Learning the ins and outs of Apache is a waste of time as it has no relevence in the business world, and it cannot compare to the scalable and supported solutions from Microsoft. Remember, Linux is only free if your time means nothing. Windows 2000 and IIS are a dream to work with compared to the half-assed Linux offerings.
Why Windows 2000 is a Great Web Server (http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/evaluation/features/webserver.asp)
Why Migrate From UNIX and Linux to Windows 2000 (http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/migrate/)
Oh, Sure, and that's why Apple choose the MacOS X to be UNIX-based!!
And what about mainframes WinblowzXPuserwhatsoever?
Tell me they use Windows too!!!
Get an OS!!!
-
Hmm lets see XP loser, both of those links go to MICROSOFT'S website. Of course those liars would say that their software is better.
-
Hey, Winblows Loser!
If 2000 is such a great server, then why doesn't MS themselves use it as often as they say we should? Hotmail.com is running on FreeBSD simply because Windows 2000 couldn't handle it. Microsoft themselves use Linux and the BSD's for their mision critical servers.
Anything on MS's web site that claims that 2000 is better than a Unix based OS is obviously a lie, and even MS doesn't believe it.
When people set up a web server they want an inexpensive reliable solution. Free/Open/NetBSD and Linux are inexpensive and very reliable, acheiving uptimes of over a year. Windows 2000 with IIS will throw you a good 300 to 800 dollars and I've never even heard of 2000 having uptimes of over a year. And countless studies have shown that the total cost of ownership of a unix based server is 30% less than that of a Windows 2000 based server.
You can't argue with facts(well you can, but you will not convince anyone here).
And other studies have proven that Apache on Linux or Unix is faster and more reliable than IIS or Apache on Windows 2000.
Winblows loser please do some quality research(read: not on MS"s site) before trying to sell MS's crap.
-
according to netcraft Apache is used by 70% of all webservers.
-
quote:
Hotmail.com is running on FreeBSD simply because Windows 2000 couldn't handle it.
Actually, smartass, hotmail.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000 according to netcraft. (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=on&mode_w=on&site=hotmail.com)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:
Actually, smartass, hotmail.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000 according to netcraft. (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=on&mode_w=on&site=hotmail.com)
actually, smartass, hotmail was running freebsd until word got around. Then microsoft switched to 2k.
-
lol, winXP luser #whore, They are running FreeBSD, and as such they are able to mask their OS and server. And they still definatley use FreeBSD on most of their other servers too.