[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Comparision presentation of Debian with RedHat



Alvin Oga wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Ralph Katz wrote:

On 06/30/04 09:00, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Dear Users, I need a little help. We are an ISP and running RedHat
distribution on our servers. I want to migrate them to Debian
gradually because of the excellent features that Debian provides like
policy, package management, release cycle, security updates and many
more. I'm looking for a presentation on "Differences between RedHat
and Debian" so as to convince my management. I'd be thankful if
anyone could help me in this regard.

that'd be a good idea ot use deb for now .. esp since rh is going the
ms route

What Are The Main Differences Between RH & Debian?

rh has commercial support $500 - $3,000 for the distro and than $50K for
annual support contract for teh big-boyz corp

There are alternative sources of support. Progeny and Lineox are two of them.

debian is NOT a company per se, so you cannot buy debian cd directly

debian has better package management

*.deb and *.rpm patches are readily available, but...
	except, you cannot necessarily get newer *.rpm security patches
for the obsoleted/unsupported rh-9
	- you do might not want play with new security patches for
	newer supported rh ( fedora, EL3, .. )

rh is a lot simpler/better installer for doing root raid installs
but it doesnt support reiserfs
I've never used reiserfs, but I thought RHL does support it. XFS is another matter, though I think it will be now it's made it into the mainline kernel.

btw I wouldn't bet on Debian supporting reriserfs for much longer, certainly as free software. I've read that there are conflicts between Hans' conditions and DFSG.


there is no major differences at the app level between any
linux distro ( same kernel, same apache, same mta, same bash, same foo )
	- same 20,000 - 30,000 packages

RHL is a commercial product and commercial realities mean RHL contains many fewer packages. More packages means more support cost, more support staff and expertise, more CDs to create.

Debian, being uncommercial, doesn't have those constraints. So far as I can tell, if it comes with source, is packaged as a deb , is useful to someone and works it can get into some place in Debian. Apparently the last criterion isn't essential.



--

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@computerdatasafe.com.au  Z1aaaaaaa@computerdatasafe.com.au



Reply to: