Why do corporations use this outdated shit for web servers?

Based, redpilled & stable

>gcc in production
are you dumb

It is often advantageous to dev on the same OS that the software will be deployed to

Sysadmins are the laziest, most incompetent people ever.
They HATE upgrading shit.
That's why they install distros that simply never update.
Eventually, after a long time, when the "stable" OS they've chosen reaches its end of life, the sysadmins all start rotating into different countries so they won't have to be the ones to upgrade like 20 major, breaking versions of every single software installed on their servers.

that's what fedora is used for

>no only keyboard control options
>company is greedy as fuck, so i have to unplug my mouse from the desktop i work at and plug it into the server just to do something
What the fuck,

>Be admin
>"It's been 2 years, maybe we should update this one thing."
>Documentation checks out. Small scale test works perfectly.
>Update the thing.
>Fucking everything breaks.
>Spend god knows how long uninstalling and reinstalling everything.
>Figure out it broke because ONE BASTARD broke security measures and installed a program that he preferred to work with our network.

Eventually, you just stop trying.

??? still newer than debian what the fuck are you on about

I run a Tor exit node on CentOS :^)

Production == The absolute (taken in a very literal sense) minimum amount of packages necessary to run your solution on your box.

It's not the same reason you fucking retard. They use Windows 2000 because most of their software is tied to specific libraries and tools written on a platform, their shit is not portable. You sometimes have software that's over 30 years old because the company doesn't exist anymore and nobody has the source code or could port it. Heck there are even dedicated protocols just for medical technology that's almost as old as windows itself.

Really kid, a web server gets so many new features? When was the last time HTTP got updated that it actually needed an update on the functionality of the web server? It's about stability, bleeding edge is only for ricing ni/g/gers who don't understand what it means to run a cluster of 200 web server in production that need to function with your application stack as it is intended.

I use gentoo server. fuck e'm all ya.

Attached: SnapCrab_NoName_2018-11-7_0-25-48_No-00.png (971x633, 36K)

Ever since hardened-sources is dead, there's absolutely no reason to use gentoo anymore.

Use OpenBSD

Every package has been tested to death for security and stability. See how long it takes to break something on CentOS vs. Arch.

>Sysadmins are the laziest, most incompetent people ever.
>They HATE upgrading shit.
>That's why they install distros that simply never update.
Try upgrading a DC with 2,000 nodes you idiot. It has to be done in stages and takes a long fucking time.

Because it's the most stable Linux distro on the planet?..

Attached: 1505004053032.png (1233x957, 173K)

Centos is still on fucking 3+ kernel what the fuck are you talking about!??

CentOS is alright but i prefer Debian for the heavy stuff or Ubuntu Server for quick stuff

Why are retards obsessed with "bleeding edge" software too stupid to add EPEL repositories or build from source?

No.
Get some work experience before you speak.

O hi NSA

I'm just a retard, but what's preventing you from cloning the Virtual disk and key network services to an isolated network and updating it, or was that the small scale test you were talking about? Also couldn't you snapshot your main server in case shit hits the fan like your server did?

School me I have a feeling there are more nuances to what you had to go to through.

It's stable, not outdated. If it's ain't broken, dont fix it

Hasn't WS2K been a HIPAA violation for half a decade?

Depends on the product. Our software (real-time satellite tracking and acquisition) is only certified on the version that it's developed and tested on. Doesn't mean it won't work on a newer version but in that case it's unsupported.

>depends on the product
no. There is no case where you would be forced to use same os to develop as it will run on.
>but but but I can't develop this software on windows because it uses this special real time os!
Write code on any os, use any tools you like - build code and run it on VM of that os of yours.
>but but that is one more step!
invisible with good tooling.
>but but it is faster and better!
If that spevial os of yours has all tools already - yah it is faster. Better? No. You install some dev tool on your dev machine, it changes config, code works on your machine, fails on pre prod (or help god - on prod), many hours of debuging ensues. It is always best to dev on machine you are comfortable with, but run your code on actual/similar hardware and prod os.

>There is no case where you would be forced to use same os to develop as it will run on.
If the product depends on the hardwrae configuration (receivers, antenna controllers, LNBs, demodulators) then it sure as shit does.

Do you guys recommend this os for daily use desktop PC?

>Sysadmins are the laziest, most incompetent people ever.
Not me. Back up all the data to somewhere safe, then update everything. And see that things are good. And updates are nice.

Because it's outdated! Imagine:
> old ass CMS developed for PHP 5.3 and then ported to PHP 5.4 in 2013
> CentOS 7 ships with PHP 5.4, supports 2.6 kernel (so no need to migrate from OpenVZ) and basically it means we're good for another 10 years from 2014.
It's an extreme case, but for real, I sometimes deal with websites written in PHP 5.3 (legacy which is off for a rewrite) and the only still-supported choice I have is CentOS 6.

Absolutely not. Use Fedora if you must, otherwise Debian Sid.

> Debian Sid.
Why not Arch then. Debian is for stability, thus Testing is the best branch for home.

Because it's stable and you can always get around packages too outdated for what you need.

For gcc, for example, I use devtoolset.

It's ok until you need proprietary drivers, in my experience.

>OpenVZ

Attached: f45.png (600x597, 196K)

this.

It's not outdated, it's stable. That's actually what you need on servers, isn't it?

It provided a container-based infrastructure before Docker even existed.

>HIPAA
Maybe, i don't work in healthcare, i work in finance, and i'd assume the regulations are the same. If you have specific reasons and technical obstacles to reduce attack vectors, you can get compliance for specific systems even if they technically are a finding. It depends on the case.

I just know folks that worked or work in healthcare and it's pretty much the same joke that PCI is.

Based on a decade old kernel. It was cool once, now it's time to move one if they refuse to upgrade from stone age code.

>no. There is no case where you would be forced to use same os to develop as it will run on.

Pipeline developer for movie studio, and this is 100% incorrect. Everyone here uses the same OS and software toolset, doesn't matter if they are devs, artists or etc...

Debian Stable and Testing are for stability, Sid is for bleeding edge. Good option if you prefer Debian, otherwise sure, go Arch.

10 year support. Biggest corporate backing of all distro.

>Based on a decade old kernel.
To be fair, we're bashing CenOS7, when v.8 will be released in another year or two. No solid date yet but when you look at the RHEL release cadence, we're due.

3.26 Gnome, newer compilers, in general newer userspace. You can use the debian kernel if you want faggot lurk more. I used to use 4.19 on my laptop but now I'm on fedora.
Tbh I like debian more but they are so fucking slow

1. It works.
2. It's stable.
3. It needs upgrades once in a blue moon.
4. Security updates for a decade or more.

OpenKZ is not Docker, not even remotely. It's a terrible system that's highly insecure and in regards to deployments as awful as a full virutalization.