> > > Just remember that Gentoo takes longer to install than a binary
distro.
> >
> > How is that relevant?  Comparing my Linux server, and my Windows server
> > (from memory, I don't have any anymore).  Windows was faster.
>
> It's very relevent. You are comparing a binary install of Windows to a
source
> install of Gentoo. A fair comparison would be of Red Hat and Windows or
Gentoo
> and getting a job as an MS developer so you can compile Windows from
source. Of
> course Windows is going to install faster when you do an unfair
comparison.

I stand by the comparison.  Where RH or Windows needs patches and fixed
installed after the fact, Gentoo is current as of the date of install.  The
time spent compiling is irrelevant.

If nothing else, I'll fall back to experience, since that's what we're
talking about.  My experience installing Gentoo has been (what you've
already read), my experience with legacy OSes is (again...).

I have RH servers too, and frankly, I don't think they're any faster to
install than Gentoo.  I spend time removing or reinstalling packages rather
than compiling correctly the first time, that's all.  Compiling is actually
OK with me.  I start the compile, and walk away for a few hours.  Removing
packages means sitting there.

> > Samba needs an upgrade before it can be installed.  Binary Distros are
old,
> > and Compile-on-the-fly need to be DLed and Compiled.  Windows has no
such
> > need.  Same with Email, Bind, Apache, etc.  Closed source doesn't allow
> > that
> > kind of tuning, so it simply doesn't happen.
>
> Get the latest distro. and upgrade to it's latest packages. Installing
packages
> that just came out yesterday can be very risky for a production server.
Use the
> tested software that comes with your distro. even if it is a month or two
old.
> What are you going to recompile every time a package comes out with a new
> version? That would be a full time job in itself.

Wasn't Aaron's advice for someone in the last 2 days to install Mdk 8.2
rather than 9, simply because 9 was "unfriendly" on his system?  That's
fine, but it kills you advice to install the latest distro.  This person
will have a gazillion different updates and packages to install.

Gentoo is simply up to date when I install it.  Period.  My servers don't go
into production until I'm happy with how they are working.  (Linux, or
Legacy).

Gentoo takes longer, but it's easier.  I like the control I have over
Gentoo.  Red Hat doesn't allow me that level of Control, at least not during
the install.  Isn't that half the reason for leaving Windows?  "I want to do
something but my legacy OS doesn't allow me to do it?"

> Of course Windows is faster at some things. Especially with Samba since
the SMB
> protocol is native to Windows.

Gee, isn't this my point?

> Yes it takes longer to setup network printers, but things like this just
keep
> getting easier in Linux. It was a pain in the ass two years ago, but it's
not so
> bad anymore. Just think what it will be like in two more years ;-)

Again, we're saying the same thing.  Windows might be faster, but the end
result sucks when compared to Linux.  And where Linux is getting better,
legacy is getting worse.

Kev.

Reply via email to