Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on April 19, 2007 07:34 AM
"CentOS did mainstream yum before RH did (though this is now included in RHEL5)"
Of course the difference is the yum-rhn plugin.
"RHN is a PITA"
That's BS. RHN does more than delivering packaging. It has provising, monitoring etc which CentOS LACKS.
" (the principle value), actual support has been "
Incorrect. Red Hat has been number one on support for n number of years.
"For those wedded to a commercial RPM-based distro, Novell's Suse exists"
That would be getting wedded to Microsoft all over again.
" I vastly prefer Debian or Ubuntu in both server and desktop roles, and generally recommend either over RH/Suse for a host of reasons which largely culminate in "more power, less pain"."
That would really be "unproven. Pretty much no ISV's"
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:What CentOS does and doesn't add
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 19, 2007 07:34 AMOf course the difference is the yum-rhn plugin.
"RHN is a PITA"
That's BS. RHN does more than delivering packaging. It has provising, monitoring etc which CentOS LACKS.
" (the principle value), actual support has been "
Incorrect. Red Hat has been number one on support for n number of years.
"For those wedded to a commercial RPM-based distro, Novell's Suse exists"
That would be getting wedded to Microsoft all over again.
" I vastly prefer Debian or Ubuntu in both server and desktop roles, and generally recommend either over RH/Suse for a host of reasons which largely culminate in "more power, less pain"."
That would really be "unproven. Pretty much no ISV's"
<a href="http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/" title="redhat.com">http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/</a redhat.com>
#