Re: [Computerbank] Linux distribution standardisation

[Julien Goodwin <jgoodwin@chriskaine.com.au>]

----- Original Message -----
> Do we need to standardise on a linux distribution?
-- At least in each state, but a national distro could make some things
easier, I must say that the CBV debian installs work great.

>Given the lack of discussion my last posting generated can I assume that
this is not a big issue for people here?
-- Not really a big one for me, since I don't do installs, debian is also
nice to work with after installation

> Of the replies I did receive one person suggested that each branch should
choose its own distribution based on the skills/experience available in the
volunteers - is this a satisfactory approach?
-- To a point, really the choice should be between RedHat & Debian, almost
all other distros (except slackware) are based off them, and the other major
distros (Mandrake, Suse, Caldera) are mostly just enhacements making linux
'prettier' and 'easier to install' both of which arn't a concern.

> If you feel that Computerbank should standardise on a particular Linux
distribution maybe you could discussion and share your thoughts on some of
the following questions:
> a) why do we need to standardise on a Linux distribution
-- If a recipient moves interstate? Makes support eaiser (only if we
standardise on a version)

> b) what distribution should we pick and why
-- Either RedHat or Debian, RH gives the benefit of the kickstart installs
where it would be 'stick a NFS boot disk in, answer three questions, leave
for half an hour, come back to a complete basic system', but Debian has less
bloat.

Julien Goodwin
_______________________________________________
computerbank mailing list
computerbank@lists.linux.org.au
http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/computerbank