🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 06 Nov 1997 19:46:29 GMT, Ralph Buttigieg <ralphb@zip.com.au> wrote:
>
>>>
>><P>ahh, the eternal question.
>><BR>&nbsp;
>>
>><P>if you want to run linux that looks as close as possible to a normal
>>type unix, run slakware.&nbsp; if you want to get into the whole linux
>>filesystem and package management, etc use redhat.
>>
>><P>There's quite a bit of difference between the distributions, I've been
>>a sysadmin on various platforms (SCO, AIX, Solaris,&nbsp;IRIX, etc) for
>>5 years, and I can move around a slakware box just like any other machine.&nbsp;
>>however, I've recently installed redhat on a spare partition, and I can't
>>find configs to do all sorts of really easy stuff.
>><BR>&nbsp;

Hwreas I've been a sysadmin for some years, on many different machines and I found
it dead easy.

"Hmm.. OK.  it's clearly SYSV like IRIX.  OK...  lets take a look in 
init.d...  yup there is all is, now where is it reading its configs
from?  OK, over here.  "

Took me all of what?  10 minutes?

I guess cos I've had to learn all those different unices in emergency 
situations so I've learned how to find things.  After all - SunOS, 
IRIX, AIX and OSF all have their config files in all sorts of
differnt palces and do things in wildly different ways.

Ain't no such thing as "standard Unix filesystem layout".

I found RedHat quite simple to set up and use.  Ditto Slackware.

I used RedHat cos it was the first one out with decent
package management which I found good when adminning loads
of the bloody things.

I beleive Debian is also good in that way.

And If you don;t wanna muck about reading scripts to see how everything
hangs together, RedHat's X based config manager does most of the
hard work for you anyway.

Zebee