[CentOS] CentOS-6 Status updates

Thu Jun 16 11:15:51 UTC 2011
Tom H <tomh0665 at gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Craig White <craig.white at 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 at 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 completely out-of-date.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.