[CentOS] Redhat vs centos vs ubuntu

Thu Nov 10 15:37:11 UTC 2011
John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk>

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Scott Robbins wrote:

> Yeah, all kidding aside, I think the whole crippling of the RH text
> installer was a step in the wrong direction.  A text installer is
> smaller, faster, and doesn't suddenly, as has happened to me with
> various video card monitor combos, stop working or have the buttons off
> the screen and no way to reach them save to tab, enter, and hope you're
> on the right one.

I don't entirely disagree, but it didn't make sense to maintain two code
bases.  Even with EL5 there were differences in what you could do in text vs
graphical (can't remember the details but there was something missing RAID/LVM
related).  If you're doing a one off install either you've normally got
functional network to another computer and so can use VNC, or you've got a
usable graphics setup.  It's not *that* often you've not got either.  For
non-one offs then you're installing with kickstart so it doesn't really

> Well, Fedora is going to systemd, which seems more designed for
> desktop/laptop users, where speed of a boot seems to be the most
> important goal, so I suspect RH will get there too.

upstart/systemd both should both offer more than we're used to.  Having a
service marked as 'should be on' such that it gets kicked back into life if it
crashes isn't necessarily a bad thing.