Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

Winblowz · 2006-10-02 04:01:48

I am still a newbie when it comes to setting up servers. I run my own home server on a Red hat based distro called ClarkConnect. It uses a nice web-based interface to control the system services, but I think I want to switch to something more advanced.

I haven't been using Arch for that long (on the desktop), but I love it, and I was thinking about using it for my server. My server pc is an AMD K6-2 500mhz. I've heard some posts say that it was i686 compatible, and others not. I would like to at least try though

My main concern with using Arch on my server is #1 documentation, I've seen some articles on the Arch wiki about setting up a mail server, but not THAT much. Most of it had to do with complex configurations, while I only need a simple Dovecot/Postfix setup.

Another thing I've heard is that Arch is too unstable for use as a server. Can someone tell me if this will be a problem?

I'd really appreciate all comments.

The_Nerd · 2006-10-02 05:13:15

I've been running Arch on my fileserver for about two years now.

It's seen many a "pacman -Syu" and most of the time its survived. I have had a few times where it has refused to boot, but after about 5 minutes with the arch install cd I have been able to fix things up right away.

All in all, I'd say it works well for my purposes as a webserver and file server, though I did look into mailserver documentation at one time and I deemed it too complex for my doing. It has since been a while, but I have yet to tackle it.

The nice thing about arch for me, is that since i'm farmilar with it on my desktop, I feel very comfortable working on it and maintaining it over say Debian or Gentoo.

If you're willing to spend some time on configuration of your mailserver then go for it. Heck, if you find an easier way to do things then add it to the Wiki!

Anways just for refrence...

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Hula_Howto
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PostFix_Howto
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Exi … MTP_server

Apache, PHP, MYSQL work like a dream on arch and are VERY easy to setup, so no problems there. I'd say go for it and take the time to figure out the proper way to setup postfix for your situation.

Regardless of what you choose, best of luck!

phrakture · 2006-10-02 16:27:16

I have a development server at work running arch. It runs wildfire (for jabber), apache, mysql, many php services, and about 6-7 torque (the game engine) servers. I update it at least every other day, with no problems (hooray).

liem · 2006-10-02 16:41:54

Sure, it work fine, it's linux after all. Rolling release isn't a perfect fit for a server, but as long you check out the forum before an upgrade you should be fine. And update once every few days, big updates tend to break things.

Personally I can't be bothered and run OpenBSD on my server (thttpd, mpd, sftp, mercurial), nice and secure.

slackhack · 2006-10-02 17:24:37

i think arch would make a good home server. if you run it remotely with no physical access, or no monitor, kb, etc. i would probably choose something less cutting edge and more "stable," like debian or slackware. otherwise, what "breaks" in arch from upgrades is usually relatively minor and easily fixed. most of the time there's a fix before you even know you have the problem. the people around here are totally on top of things, ime.

toxic · 2006-10-03 10:26:39

I'd say webserver / fileservers works well any pretty much any linux distribution.

I never could see the reason to run pacman -Syu at all on a server. I'm pretty happy with the kernel, apache version etc that I have when I installed the server in the first place. (Well, I'm using Ubuntu for my server, but still, I see no reason to upgrade the server).

A server running on 2.4 kernel would probably work as well. Updating might break things, but the downside of not updating is that newly discovered - and fixed - security issues will remain a threat for your system.

Winblowz · 2006-10-05 05:57:39

Thanks guys for all the replies! I think I'm going to give Arch a try on my server

T-Dawg · 2006-10-05 10:30:58

linux is linux. As long as it's up to date it'll be fine.

RedShift · 2006-10-08 21:33:23

imho it's not so stable because they change the initscripts alot.

At this moment, to me it looks like they'll leave them alone for a while now because they seem pretty much feature-complete.

bostoniman · 2006-10-09 00:23:42

I operate an Arch server that runs Apache, PHP, MySQL, as well as Postfix and courier. I saw you mentioned that the mail server setup looked too complex. If you take a little bit of time to compare the configs that come wit hthe packages to the examples in the wiki, you'll notice that you really don't have to do that much to get it going - just a couple of changes and you're good to go. Obviously, the more complex and feature-rich you want your mail server to be, the more work it will take (setting up SSL-secured IMAP was a little tricky) but getting it going isn't hard at all.

I've had my server running for about 2.5 years at this point, without any problems whatsoever. I would definitely recommend using Arch for a server.

toxic · 2006-10-09 13:20:33

bostoniman wrote:

I've had my server running for about 2.5 years at this point, without any problems whatsoever. I would definitely recommend using Arch for a server.

2.5 years without reboot and regular system upgrades, or 2.5 years with like weekly reboots and a 2.4 kernel?

darkcoder · 2006-10-10 03:17:26

while Arch Linux keeps with upstream updates very close, it has one big issue I specify here in problem #2

In short, when removing, or updating packages the service is not restarted.

While it provides a safe mecanism where there is no danger if a stopped service do not restart, there is also a unsafe action where you keep a buggy or unsafe daemon running on memory,

Michel · 2006-10-12 15:29:53

Hello,

I've setup archlinux as a subversion-server in our company and it is running well. I don't have any big problems. It's running on vmware esx (kernel 2.6) and it's running nicely like mentionned before. I've setup ntp to keep the time in sync. Time-synchronisation is maybe needed when you use vmware. If I wanted I could install webmin or other software, but I'm just using vim at the moment, which works nicely for now.

However, you have to be carefull when upgrading sometimes that all packages still work. A big part of the problem is that I have made PKGBUILD's for packages that aren't available in the repositories (maybe in community ...) and had some problesm when upgrading, but you can tell pacman to not upgrade some packages and then you don't have the upgrade-problem. Of course, you'll have to upgrade everything yourself then ...

I'll maybe make my PKGBUILD's (mod_auth_kerb, trac, certain trac-plugins, ...) available soon, but I'll wait till I can upgrade everything to the latest subversion-release.

It takes some effort to configure the system if you don't know how in the beginning, but you can maybe find good information on the internet. There is the archwiki, gentoo-wiki, tldp, ... There are more places to find configuration-information than in the archwiki.

Greetings,

Michel

Pierre · 2006-10-12 17:40:21

I think Arch is great for servers, but it is too slow on security-updates. E.g. I posted an updated PKGBUILD for php to the ml and got no response; so using php from current is still a security-risk. But ok, there are perhaps too few maintainers to react fast enough on such thinfs.

Purch · 2006-10-12 21:19:08

Pierre wrote:

I think Arch is great for servers, but it is too slow on security-updates. E.g. I posted an updated PKGBUILD for php to the ml and got no response; so using php from current is still a security-risk. But ok, there are perhaps too few maintainers to react fast enough on such thinfs.

Maybe it is time for a bug report?

shadowhand · 2006-10-12 23:09:03

I'm currently working on hardening the apache and php packages (mod_security by default, woo!) and hoping that my updates will be accepted as the official packages. Please do report bugs though!

Pierre · 2006-10-12 23:17:16

Sorry, but I do not think mod_security is the right way. Better write your apps more secure. Anyway: such modules should not be the default.

OK, I`ll post a bugreport and I hope I`ll met some devs at the bugsquashingday. ;-)

shadowhand · 2006-10-13 19:22:02

shadowhand wrote:

I'm currently working on hardening the apache and php packages (mod_security by default, woo!) and hoping that my updates will be accepted as the official packages. Please do report bugs though!

PHP now has modular (shared) mcrypt support, and mod_security has been added to [extra] (not default in apache pkg).

BTW, mod_security isn't using badly written apps, it's about preventing web attacks in any form, including PHP scripts, POST/GET requests, telnet, scanning uploads for viruses, etc. Saying "use better apps" isn't a replacement for what mod_security does.

Pierre · 2006-10-13 19:43:44

I thought mod_security just filters known hacks....ok I`ll take a further look.

Perhaps the suhosin-patch and extension for php could be intersting, too. But it seems still to be a kind of beta-software: suhosin.org

Did you fix this security-hole? http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/5575

fk · 2006-10-13 20:41:33

PHP is a one big security hole...

shadowhand · 2006-10-13 22:24:13

Pierre wrote:

Did you fix this security-hole? http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/5575

No, that's beyond the scope of what I can do while touching someone else's pkg.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-10-02 04:01:48

Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#2 2006-10-02 05:13:15

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#3 2006-10-02 16:27:16

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#4 2006-10-02 16:41:54

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#5 2006-10-02 17:24:37

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#6 2006-10-03 10:26:39

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#7 2006-10-05 05:57:39

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#8 2006-10-05 10:30:58

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#9 2006-10-08 21:33:23

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#10 2006-10-09 00:23:42

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#11 2006-10-09 13:20:33

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#12 2006-10-10 03:17:26

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#13 2006-10-12 15:29:53

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#14 2006-10-12 17:40:21

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#15 2006-10-12 21:19:08

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#16 2006-10-12 23:09:03

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#17 2006-10-12 23:17:16

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#18 2006-10-13 19:22:02

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#19 2006-10-13 19:43:44

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#20 2006-10-13 20:41:33

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

#21 2006-10-13 22:24:13

Re: Does ArchLinux work well on a server?

Board footer