To what extent RHEL Deployment Guide can be used for ubuntu?

Daniel J Blueman daniel.blueman at
Thu Jul 22 09:24:52 UTC 2010

On 22 July 2010 03:31, Peng Yu <pengyu.ut at> wrote:
> Hi,
> I don't find a deployment guide in ubuntu as complete as the following
> one from RHEL.
> Although I do see man pages, but I'd prefer a complete guide rather
> than scattered manuals. Ubuntu has a manual,
> but for example missing autofs (I know this is available in the man
> page, but I prefer a complete manual, as I can always check a man page
> if I want), which is available from RHEL deployment guide.
> Note that I'm not complaining ubuntu doesn't provide a complete
> manual. Rather I want to understand what the difference is between
> RHEL and ubuntu, so that I can understand to what extent I can use
> RHEL deployment guide for ubuntu.
> In particular, I want to set a cluster of 4 servers (maybe expanded
> later). I know that RHEL are commonly used for servers (maybe that is
> why it has a more complete guide?). My understanding is that ubuntu
> should have whatever packages available in RHEL. But why RHEL is
> popular for servers (or maybe I'm wrong at this point)?
> In case that there is a disadvantage to set the servers use ubuntu,
> maybe I should just use RHEL without worrying the document
> completeness?

My experience of deploying both Ubuntu LTS and Redhat EL servers is
simply people/organisations simply expect Redhat, from being used to
it. This is changing, and I am find more and more performance losses,
limitations and lack of packages, all addressed by a ubuntu-server LTS

Much of the Redhat deployment guide is relevant, since it talks about
protocols and strategies for deploying services, and you can find the
equivalent packages often with 'apt-cache search <package>' or equiv
in Synaptic.
Daniel J Blueman

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list