[BrettOZ]

Anyone out there still running Server 10.2 ?

Just curious to know if it is still a good option for a basic Web/File/Quicktime server for Home? Are security updates still being released for this version? Any info would be appreciated...

[CatOne]

Ugh. A lot of the components are pretty old in 10.2. Why not use 10.4?

[BrettOZ]

I own 10.2 Server, just want to see if is worth upgrading to 10.4 ?

I do not really see any benefits, as I am running it on a G4 933 - not an Xserve... and only use it as a basic Web/File server

Just wanted to get some opinions...

[clebin]

Originally Posted by CatOne

Ugh. A lot of the components are pretty old in 10.2. Why not use 10.4?

Shouldn't you ask him exactly what he needs before he wastes his own money on a software upgrade?

By default 10.4 still uses Apache 1.3, so it's not going to make much difference to your web-serving. There is an Apache 2.0 installation you can set up, but unless you have a requirement for it, I wouldn't bother.

I recently upgraded a web-server from 10.2 to 10.4 because PHP 5 was not available for 10.2 and I needed the new XML functions.

Unless you've got a solid requirement like that, I really wouldn't bother.

What you use on your desktop is a different matter - 10.4 is much more enjoyable to use - but if basically what you're doing is downloading and uploading files, 10.2 is quite good enough IMO.

Chris

[waffffffle]

Apple doesn't offer updates for 10.2 anymore. If I were to use it as a server I would use the third party apache installation packages. Also, AFP and QTSS are vastly improved since Jag.

[CatOne]

Originally Posted by clebin

Shouldn't you ask him exactly what he needs before he wastes his own money on a software upgrade?

By default 10.4 still uses Apache 1.3, so it's not going to make much difference to your web-serving. There is an Apache 2.0 installation you can set up, but unless you have a requirement for it, I wouldn't bother.

I recently upgraded a web-server from 10.2 to 10.4 because PHP 5 was not available for 10.2 and I needed the new XML functions.

Unless you've got a solid requirement like that, I really wouldn't bother.

What you use on your desktop is a different matter - 10.4 is much more enjoyable to use - but if basically what you're doing is downloading and uploading files, 10.2 is quite good enough IMO.

Chris

Apache is the same, but Perl and PHP are MUCH older versions, mySQL is a lot older version, and Ruby wasn't packaged with 10.2 at all. My advice if you want to use 10.2 is to download and build all the components from scratch.

Plus the mail server on 10.2 is hopelessly crappy (10.3 and 10.4 use Cyrus and Postfix, versus the old Apple Mail server which was an open relay by default), Open Directory works in 10.3/10.4 (versus being a fragile shell over NetInfo in 10.2)... the changes are huge.

I'd say 10.4 "client" would be a better server product than 10.2 server, if you just want to use Apache.

[BrettOZ]

Thanks for the advice everyone - much appreciated.

[clebin]

Originally Posted by CatOne

Apache is the same, but Perl and PHP are MUCH older versions, mySQL is a lot older version, and Ruby wasn't packaged with 10.2 at all. My advice if you want to use 10.2 is to download and build all the components from scratch.

Plus the mail server on 10.2 is hopelessly crappy (10.3 and 10.4 use Cyrus and Postfix, versus the old Apple Mail server which was an open relay by default), Open Directory works in 10.3/10.4 (versus being a fragile shell over NetInfo in 10.2)... the changes are huge.

I'd say 10.4 "client" would be a better server product than 10.2 server, if you just want to use Apache.

There are installers available for PHP and MySQL - you don't need to build anything.

Entropy.ch has PHP 4.3.4, which IIRC is newer than the default PHP on OS X 10.4. To run PHP5 on Tiger you'd probably go to Entropy.ch anyway.

MySQL.com has MySQL 4.1 available for 10.2.

I doubt he needs Open Directory or anything more than SMTP if this is a simple web & file server.

You're right with your last point though.

Chris

[BrettOZ]

Ended up buying Tiger Server, just working through setting it up now

Thanks for the info though

[clebin]

Originally Posted by BrettOZ

Ended up buying Tiger Server, just working through setting it up now

Thanks for the info though

Show off!

[olePigeon]

10.2 should be fine for basic web and filesharing.

10.2 is also more old-mac friendly than 10.3 or higher. It'll still do BootP (satic DHCP) for B&W G3s, iMacs, and PCI G4s that can't use NetBoot 2.0. In 10.3 and 10.4 you have to futs with the Machine Tree and manually enter in static IPs and enable NetBoot 1.0. It's a pain.

[C.J. Moof]

I've got a 460 gig RAID 5 serving web and files to 40 clients via an Xserve 10.2. It works quite well, though I do want to upgrade just for the superior management tools in 10.4