Choosing a Linux Distribution

Recently I have had more time to work with Linux. I had been using Ubuntu in some way for two years when I needed to set up Linux on a few years old server. Since I was comfortable with Ubuntu, I thought I might as well go ahead and use it. But then I found out that there were other alternatives as well. This caused a headache which still isn’t resolved to this day. Which distribution is the best to get hands-on, real world experience with?


You have to look at your comfort level when choosing a distribution. If you are familiar with something, even in passing, it would be an easier path to go with what you know. On the other hand, all distributions may be different but they have more in common than there are differences. So learning another distribution style is not as difficult as one might expect.

Hardware Support

If the distribution you choose is not able to function on the hardware you have available, you should not choose it. If you can get it to work, with or without a lot of effort, all the power to you. If, however, you can’t get it to work, you might as well look for another option. I went ahead with Ubuntu on the server because it supported all its hardware out of the box. I did not have to tweak anything or waste a lot of time. On the same server I was unable to install CentOS because Red Hat had dropped support for server’s RAID card in its current distribution.


For what purpose are you using a distribution? Is it going to be for starting out, testing, development, or deployment? For all these scenarios, there are many distributions fitting them just fine. For starting out, a friendly distribution like Ubuntu could work. If you are testing Linux for its feasibility in your environment, just about any distribution would work. A distribution for doing development work should be fast moving with new technology so that you can use it to its fullest extent. If it’s for production deployment, being conservative in your selection is recommended.

Cutting Edge Technology

Some distributions strive to be on the cutting-edge. I count Fedora, openSUSE, and Ubuntu in this category. They release new stuff every few months. So you get to work with what’s new. For example, on Ubuntu, I found Django packages ready to install and work. Since I wanted a package and I found it, I was able to start working. I did not have to jump through hoops just to get to the point where I would be able to work.


Yes, an enterprise version would be more stable and maybe more secure. But it is also less likely to include new technology in an easily accessible format. Taking the example of Django, I have not found any tutorial on the web to install it on CentOS using an RPM package. All tutorials I have read ask you to download and install from source. Yes, it’s the traditional way to do things but if package management is the future, we should look for packages first and source code later. Now if I am developing and deploying an application developed with Django, I want to have the peace of mind that I installed a package that had been tested to work well with the whole operating system, and not something I installed without knowing how it would turn out.

To me this is the most important point after hardware support. I am willing to learn a whole another distribution if it is enterprise level with great hardware support but also keeps up with new technology. Since not one distribution will always fill these requirements, we have to look at the best tool for the job at hand.


I was shocked to learn a few days ago that Ubuntu server’s default firewall policy was to accept all traffic. CentOS, on the other hand, has a pretty aggressive firewall policy. Combined with recent scandal of Debian and OpenSSL, it has dented my confidence in Ubuntu. It’s not that Ubuntu is insecure, it’s just the appearance of security in the ecosystem is absent (to me, at least). It’s also not that these things cannot be rectified by me, it’s that why would I need to take an extra step when a prudent decision could do it for me in the first place.

Another aspect I look to is being root. Does one have to actually be root or would sudo do? I like the sudo model better since it forces you to actually type your permission when doing critical work. Yes, if you are careful su and su - would work as well as sudo. But I like the added carefulness of sudo. So the first thing I do after installing a distribution is to see if it has sudo and then enable it for at least one user.


Support is a very important part of decision-making process. Support may be of three kinds: distribution creator, third-party professional, and community and friends. Support includes help as well as software updates. One can get help from many sources, and community is an essential part of this support ecosystem. It can get you started and get you out of trouble. Almost all (ok, maybe all) distributions provide software updates. Then there is an extra level of support which we know as enterprise or corporate support (think Red Hat). It is provided by either the creators and maintainer of the distribution or from third-party entities.

For a home user, software updates and community support should be sufficient. For a business, however, ‘corporate’ support is essential on production systems. Businesses like to pay someone to get extra insurance in case it is needed. If a server is essential to business operations, it is very important that the team running the server knows what it is doing, has community support for minor issues, and corporate support when things go really bad.

Red Hat, Novell, and Canonical provide this kind of support as they create their distributions. Of course, if you have a good team running your servers, you may not need to get corporate support. But if your manager is a non-technical person, she will most probably require it. And if it’s not your money being spent, why argue?


This was meant to be a discussion of factors I would look into when choosing a distribution. Nothing more, nothing less.

Disclaimer: I have edited, and will edit, this post as new arguments come up.

3 Responses to Choosing a Linux Distribution

  1. ozjd says:

    You raise some interesting points. I would agree with much of what you say. However Linux is about choice so most users are happy to experiment to get things working. I guess the ideal balance would be that things should work with basic functionality when installed but have available options to tweak for best performance / compatibility.

    A fire wall that doesn’t protect seems very strange, when I installed Fedora it asked if I wanted the firewall activated and the services to allow as part of the installation. That is probably the best way to handle that and similar situations. I guess many Ubuntu users are sitting there feeling protected because the firewall is on but aren’t as safe as they think.

    BTW Django is available in the fedora repos so rpms do exist for it.

  2. hs says:

    I found an article on installing Django on Fedora: Installing / Configuring / Caching Django on your Linux server. Turns out one needs the Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux repository. I haven’t tried it yet but if one adds this repository, it should allow to install Django using yum.

  3. sandrar says:

    Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog. :) Cheers! Sandra. R.

%d bloggers like this: