Building a new box

grandpa's hogging all the time

[grandpa]

We discussing getting another PC (small business) and I'm trying to making the argument that we need to set it up as a standalone server. My reasoning is that we don't have a decent backup of our sites, ready to roll out if needed. And in the last 10 months I've added quite a bit beyond the plain html site of olde. If I had to move everything tomorrow I'm basically screwed

I've argued that it doesn't *need* to be connected to anything, just that it should be ready in case it's needed. So here's what I'm pushing for:

Red Hat standard version
Apache
PHP
MySQL

The only cost I can find is for Red Hat, and it's a lot less that anything we can get from M$. I'm assuming RH will support almost any other software we need as well; label programs, accounting software, etc.

Am I missing anything here? It really seems a like a waste to just get another PC, just so it will be available for anyone else to use (I'm on this box about 18 hrs a day).

[hayseed]

Is there a specific reason that you need a standalone machine? If it's just for backup purposes, wouldn't partitioning/adding a hard drive to your existing machine be enough? You could regularly gzip your sites so that they're ready to upload to the server and unzip & presto! No?

[grandpa]

The machine won't just be for backup. I'll probably want to develop and test on it also.

Saving everything on this machine doesn't resolve the real (perceived) problem, that folks around here think I'm too grumpy to ask me to get out of the way for while. (I'm not, and I will, but they won't).

Same logic applies to a second drive or another partition.

So, I'm trying to get a feel for the server option. I've only ever set up one server, it was M$, and never used as a server anyway.

My gut feeling is that my approach will cost less and serve us much better in the long run. But, I am a little out of my element going down this path.

[m_shroom]

If you are writing in php the second machine is a great time saver.

I use 2 machines all the time.

#1. Machine Suse 9.1 pro setup as as server/desktop and write my php scripts useing Quanta (great editor) wright on my server.

#2 Machine (any) must be beside #1.

With #2 conected to #1 (server) write on #1 preview on #2, (debug/make changes on #1 hit refresh #2).

With the time I have saved so far could have set 50+ of these units.

As for data always keep the can't lose data on at least 2 sepperate hard drives (all hard drives will fail some day maybe today, maybe in several years).

I would highly recomend SuSe 9.1 pro every thing is there, installs are easy, config is as easy as can be done in LINUX, updates are as simple as it gets and support is great (not that you should ever need it).

[henry0]

m_shroom
I use almost the same setup and Quanta
but use RH
what's the major dif in between SuSe and RH

regards

Henry

[m_shroom]

what's the major dif in between SuSe and RH

Unable to answer that question as I have not tried RH lately. Found SuSe 8.0 a couple of years ago and have not looked back. YaST2 is so easy to use that comand line utlitys go almost completly unsed. Rpm's can be installed useing KPackage (gui) even RH rpm's.