On 6/7/06, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Steve.Craft@sungard.com>
> To: <users@subversion.tigris.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 2:44 PM
> Subject: RE: Look for help on windows server platform
>
>
> > I'm not 100% sure why "linux as a subversion server is better".
> >
> > As far as I know, Apache==Apache, Subversion==Subversion, etc.
> >
> > Can someone elaborate on that?
This is veering well off-topic, but a few points:
> Security, since Linux has much b etter ability to turn unnecessary or
> undesired services by simply never installing them.
Windows 2003 has implemented a lot of "deny by default" features,
especially with services. I haven't done a 2003 installation myself
(only worked with it), so I can't speak to how many services are
selectable in the install, but most non-essentials are turned off by
default now. When I last installed Fedora Core, I had to go back and
manually disable (at boot) a number of services it wanted to run by
default.
> Security, since Linux almost never requires rebooting to implement the
> latest software or security patches.
I don't see how required reboots translate to less security. Also,
the number of reboots required is far lower than it used to be for
Windows, and they can be scheduled for minimal impact on the users.
> Security, since tools like SSH and sudo allow much safer and easier
> management of user accounts and administrative privileges.
These facilities exist with Windows, it's a matter of administrators
using them and applications not assuming you've always got Admin
rights. Active Directory allows an insane level of control.
> Security, since the web and office suites tools on Linux are historically
> far more secure than those for Microsoft.
Office tools (and most other desktop applications) would have no place
on a Subversion server in the first place, so I don't see how this is
relevant.
> Vastly easier duplication of a server setup to new or replacement hardware.
Tools exist for Windows to make a master image and "clone" it to set
up multiple boxes quickly.
> Less expensive hardware to run the server, allowing easy availability of a
> hot failover setup when coupled with the ease of mirroring a repository
> under Linux.
Hot failover and high availability hardware costs money regardless of
your OS. What stops you from using the same tools to keep mirrors of
a repository on Windows? Perl, Python, SVN, rsync, ssh, etc. all have
Windows ports.
As for the later arguments of "remote administration" and
"scriptability" lacking in Windows servers, those may have been good
arguments 6 years ago. But not today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jun 8 14:34:22 2006