Skip to main content

ubuntu 14.04 - VPS Admin Panel




I got a simple question. I have this VPS hosted on Linode.com and I am currently using webmin and virtualmin. I have one domain, do not plan to have to multiple domains, I want subdomain and my dns will be be managed by my provider dns tool.



I will be using php7, redmine, and install a nominatim instance meaning I will have mysql, php7, ruby, postgresql, passenger and will mainly use php7 with probably php7-fpm and also use smtp on ubuntu 14.04.



Now, using webmin and virtualmin has been overly complicated to do anything. In fact, I spent most of time on the terminal than trying to set up the server through webmin/virtualmin.



Now that you know my needs. Do you think that an admin panel + webhosting panel is useful for my specific case or could I simply use a basic lamp stack without all the cumbersomeness of admin panels.



Everything got so messed up because of virtualmin that uses some sort of unique cgi/fcgi bin to transfer data and because its not compatible php7, I had to manually edit those files but they were protected with something that makes sudo not work (special type of file, do not remember the name). Anyhow, I'm just tired of using virtualmin and I will reset my whole installation.




Should I stick with webmin/virtualmin or perhaps only webmin or maybe ispconfig or simply install a lamp stack manually and forget about virtualmin.



Sorry for the long wall of text.


Answer



Do. Not. Use. An. Admin. Panel. Ok?



:)



Seriously, though. They're universally clumsy, they do odd things to your servers that make them impossible or difficult to troubleshoot via standard means, and perhaps worst of all, they actively prevent you from learning proper systems administration, and from acquiring the knowledge and skills necessary to do your job and to troubleshoot things.




Truth be told, Webmin is the least bad of the bunch. The rest? They're not worth the bits they're made of.



If you need to automate repetitive tasks on your server (a frequent feature that draws people to admin panels), then do so using a proper configuration management system.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more