On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Craig White craig.white@ttiltd.com wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Tom H wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:50 AM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
Like RHEL/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS is absolutely appropriate for server use. In fact, it's sort of refreshing to set up a new server that isn't overloaded with bloat from the very start. Setting up a new VMWare image w/ Ubuntu Server takes at most 10 minutes whereas doing the same w/ CentOS 5 takes almost an hour (easier just to clone my base install copy kept for just that purpose).
I actually use Fedora for my Desktop. It dual boots to Ubuntu but I don't often use it. The only reason that I ever saw people using Fedora for production was because the RHEL/CentOS software packages were so completely out-of-date.
Both CentOS and Ubuntu server installs take as long for me. Are you comparing similar levels of install?!
I am generally interested in a basic install. On this Macintosh, VMWare Fusion, installing 64 bit Ubuntu-server-amd64 it's about 10 minutes. Installing 64 bit CentOS 5.6 x86_64 took about an hour. I didn't time anything but I remember clearly. Of course the install from Ubuntu was a single CD iso and CentOS was a DVD iso and the bandwidth at my office is extremely good.
A similar install is difficult since Ubuntu will have to indicate that you want to install even openssh-server and CentOS (noting that many of the decisions emanate from upstream) by default puts on a full GUI and you have to knowingly trim down the packages to attempt to minimize the installation.
I don't really understand what you're doing but Ubuntu server and CentOS with a GUI are certainly not the same installs. For me the Ubuntu equivalent of a kickstart "@base" install and a CentOS kickstart "@base" install take pretty much the same time.