Mailing List Archive

Aaron Siegel wrote:

> Hello
>
> I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
> Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
> administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
> have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
> strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
> on a low volume file single processor server?

In my experience, yes.. we're running a production on a 2.6 hardened
kernel.. not had one problem with it :)

y.m.m.v. of course.. but I'd say go for it..

>
> I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
> patience.
>
> Thank you
>
> Aaron
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>


--
(___) Joel Merrick
(o o) www.joelmerrick.com
/-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
/ | ||O
* ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
~~ ~~

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Actually we re using in all of our servers the last 2.4 version, just
in case. Included one firewall (iptables) with 2.4 hardened with
SELinux.

2.6 is stable enough? yeah, sure, but I prefer to give the hard work
to the 2.4 version, compiled with USE="-*". In my desktop and
notebook I use 2.6 ( even the love or mm patches).


andres



On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:26:53 +0100, Joel Merrick <joel@joelmerrick.com> wrote:
> Aaron Siegel wrote:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
> > Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
> > administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
> > have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
> > strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
> > on a low volume file single processor server?
>
> In my experience, yes.. we're running a production on a 2.6 hardened
> kernel.. not had one problem with it :)
>
> y.m.m.v. of course.. but I'd say go for it..
>
> >
> > I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
> > patience.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
>
>
> --
> (___) Joel Merrick
> (o o) www.joelmerrick.com
> /-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
> / | ||O
> * ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
> ~~ ~~
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>



--
---

When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only immortal
For a limited time

Neil Peart - Dreamline

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Andres Moore wrote:

> Actually we re using in all of our servers the last 2.4 version, just
> in case. Included one firewall (iptables) with 2.4 hardened with
> SELinux.
>
> 2.6 is stable enough? yeah, sure, but I prefer to give the hard work
> to the 2.4 version, compiled with USE="-*". In my desktop and
> notebook I use 2.6 ( even the love or mm patches).

I never knew you could wildcard the USE flags! Is that your actual line
in make.conf or is it a generalisation?

USE="-*" sounds clean ;)

>
>
> andres
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:26:53 +0100, Joel Merrick <joel@joelmerrick.com> wrote:
>
>>Aaron Siegel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hello
>>>
>>>I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
>>>Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
>>>administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
>>>have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
>>>strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
>>>on a low volume file single processor server?
>>
>>In my experience, yes.. we're running a production on a 2.6 hardened
>>kernel.. not had one problem with it :)
>>
>>y.m.m.v. of course.. but I'd say go for it..
>>
>>
>>>I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
>>>patience.
>>>
>>>Thank you
>>>
>>>Aaron
>>>
>>>--
>>>gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>>>
>>
>>
>>--
>> (___) Joel Merrick
>> (o o) www.joelmerrick.com
>> /-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
>> / | ||O
>> * ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
>> ~~ ~~
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>>
>>
>
>
>
>


--
(___) Joel Merrick
(o o) www.joelmerrick.com
/-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
/ | ||O
* ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
~~ ~~

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

I can see why one would want a 2.4 important servers for work. However
for a normal desktop, 2.6 is great! In fact, I use 2.6.9-rc1-mm2 (with
nice reiserfs4 support) on my desktop, and I've never had a crash or
problem that's related to the kernel whatsoever.

Alex S.

Andres Moore wrote:

>Actually we re using in all of our servers the last 2.4 version, just
>in case. Included one firewall (iptables) with 2.4 hardened with
>SELinux.
>
>2.6 is stable enough? yeah, sure, but I prefer to give the hard work
>to the 2.4 version, compiled with USE="-*". In my desktop and
>notebook I use 2.6 ( even the love or mm patches).
>
>
>andres
>
>
>
>On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:26:53 +0100, Joel Merrick <joel@joelmerrick.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Aaron Siegel wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hello
>>>
>>>I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
>>>Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
>>>administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
>>>have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
>>>strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
>>>on a low volume file single processor server?
>>>
>>>
>>In my experience, yes.. we're running a production on a 2.6 hardened
>>kernel.. not had one problem with it :)
>>
>>y.m.m.v. of course.. but I'd say go for it..
>>
>>
>>
>>>I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
>>>patience.
>>>
>>>Thank you
>>>
>>>Aaron
>>>
>>>--
>>>gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>--
>> (___) Joel Merrick
>> (o o) www.joelmerrick.com
>> /-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
>> / | ||O
>> * ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
>> ~~ ~~
>>
>>

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Its the make.conf at the firewall. You can do that, just remind to re
emerge "pam" after reboot the machine, with the USE="pam" flag. Then,
you can back to the USE="-*" .

Take a look in the distcc config, when you want to bootstrap with
distcc you have to emerge with:
# USE='-*' emerge --nodeps distcc


My make.conf firewall: (HP DL140, 4eth), very conservative CFLAGS:

CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-mcpu=i686 -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j6"
USE="-*"


andres


On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:55:15 +0100, Joel Merrick <joel@joelmerrick.com> wrote:
> Andres Moore wrote:
>
> > Actually we re using in all of our servers the last 2.4 version, just
> > in case. Included one firewall (iptables) with 2.4 hardened with
> > SELinux.
> >
> > 2.6 is stable enough? yeah, sure, but I prefer to give the hard work
> > to the 2.4 version, compiled with USE="-*". In my desktop and
> > notebook I use 2.6 ( even the love or mm patches).
>
> I never knew you could wildcard the USE flags! Is that your actual line
> in make.conf or is it a generalisation?
>
> USE="-*" sounds clean ;)
>
> >
> >
> > andres
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:26:53 +0100, Joel Merrick <joel@joelmerrick.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Aaron Siegel wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hello
> >>>
> >>>I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
> >>>Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
> >>>administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
> >>>have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
> >>>strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
> >>>on a low volume file single processor server?
> >>
> >>In my experience, yes.. we're running a production on a 2.6 hardened
> >>kernel.. not had one problem with it :)
> >>
> >>y.m.m.v. of course.. but I'd say go for it..
> >>
> >>
> >>>I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
> >>>patience.
> >>>
> >>>Thank you
> >>>
> >>>Aaron
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >> (___) Joel Merrick
> >> (o o) www.joelmerrick.com
> >> /-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
> >> / | ||O
> >> * ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
> >> ~~ ~~
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> (___) Joel Merrick
>
>
> (o o) www.joelmerrick.com
> /-------\ / www.connectedup.co.uk
> / | ||O
> * ||,---|| GO ON LARRY SON!!
> ~~ ~~
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>



--
---

When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only immortal
For a limited time

Neil Peart - Dreamline

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

> I never knew you could wildcard the USE flags! Is that your actual line
> in make.conf or is it a generalisation?
>
> USE="-*" sounds clean ;)

I do that and I think it's great. You're supposed to use USE="-* pam
readline" at a minimum. I just add to them as I see flags in pretend
emerges I want to do for real.

- Grant

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Thanks for the tip Grant.


andres

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:08:37 -0700, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I never knew you could wildcard the USE flags! Is that your actual line
> > in make.conf or is it a generalisation?
> >
> > USE="-*" sounds clean ;)
>
> I do that and I think it's great. You're supposed to use USE="-* pam
> readline" at a minimum. I just add to them as I see flags in pretend
> emerges I want to do for real.
>
> - Grant
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>



--
---

When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only immortal
For a limited time

Neil Peart - Dreamline

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Aaron Siegel wrote:

>Hello
>
>I have been using FreeBSD for the last few years and have not been following
>Linux. I have been ask to work with (bail out) the companies network
>administrator set up two Linux computers for file sharing over a VPN link. I
>have set up some IPSEC and VPN connection using Kame. FreeSwan, Openswan,
>strongswan have been giving me nightmares. Is Linux 2.6 stable enough to use
>on a low volume file single processor server?
>
>I am sure the question has been ask many times before and I appreciate your
>patience.
>
>Thank you
>
>
>
>
I have had good luck with it in the past, and it performs very well if
you compile the entire system with nptl. Some people prefer to avoid
nptl as well, but I have not had trouble with it and it makes better use
of my hardware. I lead you to this page to investigate more ....

http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Gentoo_2004.2_for_linux_2.6_and_NPTL

Tom Veldhouse