Tell me more ×
Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 5 down vote favorite

What are the disadvantages (if any) of using Ubuntu Server Edition instead of Debian in production environment?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Jorge Castro, Marco Ceppi♦ Feb 21 '11 at 12:40

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.

3 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

I have both, debian and ubuntu servers in production and I have to say it really makes no difference. Since lucid, I probably go with Ubuntu since the virtualization with it is really good.

In some ways, you might want to make the decision if there are certain versions of essential packages in one that fit better your requirements than the other.

share|improve this answer
1  
I'd naturally recommend Ubuntu LTS server releases. The goal is stability and the Ubuntu kernel team applies the upstream stable release patches to increase the stability and reliability. The LTS is supported for 5 years on the server version, 3 years on the desktop version. – Brad Figg Aug 22 '10 at 20:22
up vote 3 down vote

Framing a question in terms of disadvantages is unlikely to give you good results. You might get answers of people with bad experience with Ubuntu Server Edition instead of real reasons why people prefer one over the other.

I stick with Debian for servers because I have not found real advantages in using Ubuntu Server Edition and if there are any, they have not been correctly communicated to me. From the few developments that I followed, Ubuntu's Server Edition tries to provide configuration tools that are easier to use than editing configuration in text files. This is great for people without former experience but once you know the few services that you're administrating, those configuration tools tend to become a burden rather than a help.

I like Debian's stability and I prefer when there's only one stable version at a given time (maybe 2 with Debian "oldstable") instead of a full range due to the new version that comes out every 6 month. So the release cycle of Debian provides a better result for usage in server context.

share|improve this answer
3  
I would never compare Debian stable to Ubuntu versions other then LTS. Ubuntu LTS gives you a defined release cycle. Debian does not. This is in my opinion the main difference. – ddeimeke Aug 6 '10 at 20:40
1  
Good point on bad experiences. I had problems with rsync in Ubuntu Hardy not working correctly. Fortunately the server in question was being used as a local file server and didn't require rsync so wasn't a show stopper. – Richard Holloway Aug 6 '10 at 20:46
up vote 0 down vote

I am supporting both kinds of servers. As long as you take Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS you will have no problems using any of them. I would not use Debian testing or other versions then LTS ones for productions systems.

In my opinion it is a matter of taste.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.