[rescue] Re: G5 case

[N. Miller]

--On Tuesday, June 24, 2003 10:46 PM -0500 Eric Dittman 
<dittman at dittman.net> wrote:

> I find RedHat to be very polished and seamless.  It also
> has a much better installation process compared to either
> NetBSD or OpenBSD (I haven't looked at FreeBSD for a
> while).  With RedHat I can fine tune what is installed
> during the installation process if I want, or I can
> select sets that have the commonly-used packages already
> included.  With NetBSD and OpenBSD I got the feeling of
> "PLOP!" as each set was installed.  After that, there
> was a lot of going out and grabbing what I needed and
> installing it, rather than getting the chance to specify
> everything I wanted and then walking away and letting
> the installer go with it.
>
> In that sense RedHat felt much more integrated and
> seamless.

I've installed Mandrake (in the past) and recently, Red Hat.
I've only ever installed FreeBSD on that side.  What I'd
really like to see on all these installers is some common
configurations like:

'loaded' scientific desktop
'loaded' development desktop
'loaded' generic desktop
server
firewall
router
DMZ mail
DMZ dns
minimum OS that runs
etc.
(more than just the desktop/server paradigm that you generally
see)

Then you should have the opportunity to add *or* subtract stuff.
The most annoying thing about RH, during the last install I did
was that it was either everything or nothing, and the stupid GUI for 
package selection is too slow and forces you to select one thing at a time. 
(And I'm not going to build a net install system to build one machine.)

At least with FreeBSD, you can install the bare minimum, then
use ports pretty easily to do the rest from the command line.

(OK, I guess that's a little too much like a whine, isn't it?
:-)  Getting old and not suffering time wasters unless they
are time wasters of my own choosing, I guess.)
=Nadine=