Web development under *nix: choosing a distribution

dezconnect2012-10-12 12:51:33

linux

dezconnect, 2012-10-12 12:51:33

Question for the connoisseurs.

What is the best distribution to use for web development from the *nix family?

A bit of history.
I have been using Linux/*BSD for a long time. I started on the Abit edition of Red Hat 6.4 (if anyone remembers this one).
One way or another, on the machine on which I am developing, there were different things and for a long time (for several years, in general more than 10 years) and Slackware and FreeBSD and Arch and Debian and a bunch of other different exotic things. So, in principle, I have a fairly sane idea about systems.

But, each of the systems has certain disadvantages. Guys tell me who uses what for web development and why. I would be grateful for detailed answers.

For my part, I note that I would like normal repositories, the stability of the system as a whole. I really like to sharpen the system for myself, starting from the organization of configuration files and ending with beautiful effects in DE.

I'm waiting for answers.

PS: as it is not funny, but FreeBSD attracts me as a model of stability. But with its system of ports, sadness rolls straight.

Answer the question

In order to leave comments, you need to log in

17 answer(s)

DevMan, 2012-10-12
@dezconnect

Each sandpiper will praise his swamp.
By and large - no difference, any modern distro.

Lev Lybin, 2012-10-12
@lybin

I use Archlinux, I didn’t find better Archlinux for myself (I tried opensuse, debian, ubuntu, calculate, fedora), everything works stably, the latest versions of packages are always, maybe this is a plus for developers, in order to install PHP 5.4, you need to tweak a little in other distros, etc. .P. But I use it not because I'm a developer, but because I like it and don't see an alternative)

super, 2012-10-12
@super

I use OS X for web development and am very satisfied.

AGvin, 2012-10-12
@AGvin

I advise you to try, and not ask which is better.
I use Fedora 17 for work (as it happens) and my home device is Ubuntu 12.04.
Of these systems, I can say that the first one is more convenient to work with installation packages, but it is worse in terms of stability. In Ubuntu, I really like how work with apache and nginx is organized, but I really don’t like Ubuntu Firewall (very used to the good old iptables)

Vladimir, 2012-10-12
@de1vin

Recently switched from ubuntu to debian.
And after I got tired of various whistles, I switched to awesome.

lightman, 2012-10-12
@lightman

Asked (and ask) exactly the same question as the author.
I'm looking for a distro, I'm trying different ones. I like everyone in their own way, but I still can’t feel “mine”. Perhaps the reason for this, I see various bugs that most users (including me) are not at all interested in dealing with. There would be opportunities to master a new system for yourself, and not try, having met the unexpected behavior of the OS, to understand whether this is a bug or you don’t understand something. Because it slows learning down considerably.
Perhaps the most discouraging bug for me personally and at the same time one of the most difficult bugs to overcome is the problem with screen tearing .
Communicating with one gentleman who understands this, I realized for myself that in order to overcome this problem, a combination of several factors is needed.
Either it's KDE + Nvidia's proprietary firewood with certain settings, or ATI's proprietary one with TearFreeDesktop enabled (and quite a compromise due to its slowness with the TearFreeDesktop option), or any composite manager. In general, something like this, I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the information, because with this for me, a novice Linux user, everything is difficult.
I did not like KDE and in the end I went to the banal Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, in which there is NO TEARING OUT OF THE BOX (the degree of caps only partly reflects the degree of happiness I experienced when I found out about it) . Moreover, I really liked the Unity environment, especially its button combinations (again, everything out of the box).
Despite the fact that the rebellion in the environment of hardened Linuxoids seems to be bad manners, it allows - and this is not a secret - to easily google solutions to many problems +, importantly, to work immediately after its installation, simultaneously studying the system at any speed and intensity, as opposed to that on other, less friendly distros, you need to spend more than one day just to bring the system to a working state and which - these distrs - load you with a lot of related information, which, although, of course, is valuable for studying the system, it does not bring pleasure at all when you don't want to deal with it, but just want to make the system work as soon as possible.
In general, there are bugs in the rebellion, but they are not critical and do not particularly interfere with work.

un1t, 2012-10-12
@un1t

We have all web developers including me, sitting on ubuntu. The web servers that we use are also on ubuntu. Ubuna has a fairly large community, which is very convenient. You can also look at debian, especially since debian is also often found on hostings.

Pavel Tereshchenko, 2012-10-12
@l2ping

I'm using Ubuntu Long Term Support (LTS). Under ubuntu, NvidiaOptimus worked without problems (with the help), which I could not achieve in fedora.

Zazza, 2012-10-12
@Zazza

I have also been using different nix/bsd at home and on servers for many years. I used to be a huge fan of FreeBSD - its installations on many servers still work. With huge uptime. Attracted to FreeBSD by its logic. As well as the ports system (?) because everything you need can be built from source with the right parameters. These are not binary packages where everything is built with dependencies like someone else decided. And also ipfw - very much used to it.
But by 2012, it so happened that nothing appeared in this OS that could distinguish it from a bunch of nix systems. The advantages of nix are a much larger community and powerful package management systems.
About 10 years ago, I thought that it doesn’t matter which distro to use, because if you know the system device well enough, then there is no point in using graphical utilities to configure the system, everything can be done by editing text configs and looking at text logs (hello systemd!) . And I assembled LFS several times to make the system "for myself", so much so that the gentoo-shniks would be envious. And portage can be screwed to your distro manually.
And, for example, the same Ubuntu did not like, because its creators tried in every possible way to “hide” the insides of the system and make their own configurators. Yes, and there were not enough packages in 6.04, and downloading them with dialup was a bit sad. Its only advantage was a free disk, which came by mail from far away.
But back in 2012, now I'm using Ubuntu 12.04 with Unity with might and main!!! I am very happy with the stability of this OS. The fact that you can install the necessary packages with a simple apt-get. There is no need to think about how to do something, because there are a huge number of younger people on the Internet who have already found a solution for you.
And on the server - Debian - it is more stable. And older graphical shells and the version of firefox for the server do not play a big role. And again apt.
PS Periodic nostalgia for picking distros recently forced me to put arch on beech. Distre interesting and pleasant. But when installing skype from the AUR, the /bin directory was erased. Booted from live cd and brought it back. Maybe it's over hands and curves, but for me the place for archa is only on a beech, not on a working computer, and even more so not on servers.

kavich, 2012-10-12
@kavich

ubuntu + lxc is the best choice, everything works out of the box. No problem with "try something new".

rakot, 2012-10-12
@rakot

I like crunchbang, what attracts me is that it is a filed debian, not remade like ubuntu, but filed with full compatibility of the debian repository, based mainly on testing repositories, not counting the off-season. Put it on a virtual machine, you might like it too.

antarx, 2012-10-16
@antarx

> when it is necessary to have several branches of the same PHP 5.3 and several branches of PHP 5.4 separately, problems begin.
Take Genta: it is quite easy to install the required version of any software from the ports, and often the ebuilds already support the ability to install php 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 at the same time, with timely security updates.
Moreover, having dealt a little with ebuilds, you can have different software in the system for each project, already compiled with the necessary options.

Pilat, 2013-08-26
@Pilat

You can do it simply: put several distributions and OS - for different purposes. For example, I have a main system with Windows 7, on which two debian 7 are now open under VirtualBox, one with standard Gnome 3, with incomprehensible goodies, one with ordinary gnome 3 (any mate did not fully work). And for all three systems there was a use. And trying to do everything in one system is just wasting time. To speed up virtualized systems, they must run on an SSD. (Now I know that 64 GB SSD is enough for everything I need for programming). And immediately there is no need for holivars, with the understanding that the OS is a tool.
Debian is also good because sane administrators know it, hosters install it, repositories for many programs are ready and up-to-date. And a set of well-described policies greatly simplifies life.

J_o_k_e_R, 2012-10-12
@J_o_k_e_R

I had little experience with FreeBSD, of Linux, gentoo is most similar to it. And certainly most of all meets the requirements of "I really like to sharpen the system for myself."

moscow_beast, 2012-10-12
@moscow_beast

I'm so pissed off: there can be any distribution kit in general, so I won't even say what I have.
But in /opt I can do everything I need, in any perverted forms, even from source codes, even from self-assembled packages - up to IE and Photoshop with a separate wine.

Alex Efros, 2012-10-13
@powerman

In my opinion, with your experience, it makes sense to choose between Ubuntu and Gentoo. The first is if the reluctance to delve into problems is stronger than the desire to set everything up for yourself, the second in the opposite situation.
I've been on Gentoo since 2004, and in my opinion, with regular (at least once a week, but preferably once a day 3) updates of the system in Gentoo, there are fewer problems than in other distributions. But if you update every half a year, then yes, each update is a rather long and often painful quest that requires a lot of attention.

Semyon Dubina, 2012-10-15
@sam002

Any distribution. Don't sweat it. Want to reduce the time spent on the system - anything with deb or rpm. Day of packet enumeration = weeks of configuring the kernel for efficiency.