[Wiltshire] CentOS

[Richard Reynolds]

On 10/03/2008, Barrie Bremner <baz-wiltslug at barriebremner.com> wrote:

> I wouldn't say there's much to choose between Debian or RH based
>  systems - installing, configuring and removing software are basically
>  the same jobs, and there are distro specific files you need to be
>  aware of, but there's not that much in it.

My oher problem with redhat other than the config differences which as
people have pointed out is a case of 'what you know' is the bloat.
Redhat is huge and slow as a result.

Try creating a decent size XEN image to run just for example apache to
serve static pages. Both debian and gentoo can create ultra small fine
tuned system out of the box with very little work. Try doing that with
whatever the default install of redhat these days is (1.7G or
something).

Perhaps I'm wrong as I haven't installed a RH system in a lot time and
I full admin to knowing gentoo and debian better these days but I
suspect it's still the bloatware of the linux world.

The best thing is watching a RH7 system boot, you have time for a cup
of tea and a read of the paper before your morning admin ;)

>  I've been using Redhat based systems since 6.0 and Debian for about as
>  long and I'd recommend either. I'm afraid Gentoo systems (particularly
>  for remote production machines) make me cringe. Binary packages++.

Gentoo has binary if you so desire. And it's very easy to maintain
your own binary packages which are complied thanks to the USE system
to very specific requirements.