Re: Ubuntu v. Fedora (overall)

[Casey Boone <caseyboone@gmail.com>]

Isnt Ubuntu a Swahili word for "can't install debian"? lol kidding kidding

I tend to favor Redhat derivatives, but I am pretty at home on any
standard distribution.  Most users probably wouldn't notice much of a
difference, most of the distros gaining traction have decent GUI
package managers these days.

The hardest thing for me going between a Redhat derivative and a
Debian derivative is the location and structure of the network config
data.  I am so used to editing /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/* by
hand that it takes me a bit to find and properly edit the file Debian
uses.

I prefer apt to yum, but have no real difficulty using either, and
beyond that everything has its config files in standard locations.

That all being said, I only use Redhat derivatives in corporate
environments, mainly due to the ease of switching over to RHEL with a
Redhat support contract if the company decides to.  I have thus far
always been happy with Redhat's ability to help and assist when
needed.  I know of no one using Ubuntu with any kind of support
contract, so I cannot comment on it.  I would imagine that it is
decent though, else someone would have made a big deal about it (I
have not checked if ubuntusupportsucks.com exists though ;} )

The whole "services" thing from the Redhat camp is just a wrapper
around /etc/init.d/whatever scripts.  I have no real preference either
way for someone calling them services or daemons, but which name I use
at the time usually depends on context.

As for Charlie's not having compiled a kernel, well, Charlie you
totally should just for the learning experience.  My first couple of
attempts weren't pretty, but it was interesting none the less.

-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.