Alright, I've resisted posting to this just because it's off topic, but
having explored it a bit, I'll put in my two cents worth. I've
installed both WhiteBox and CentOS on several machines, and the end
result is almost identical, which is expected, as they are essentially
RHEL 3. I would lean toward CentOS for two main reasons: 1) They are
a development community (multiple individuals unlikely to all become
deceased at once) as opposed to an individual creating a distro such as
with Tao or Whitebox, so might be more long lived, and 2) using yum for
upgrades, I have found Whitebox to be very slow, although I freely admit
to having not explored mirrors.
Also, I upgraded a RH9 workstation to Centos3 no problem. Just download
the Centos yum.conf and do an upgrade. There were maybe three or four
dependency issues (development libraries I had to dismiss, but didn't
need on a server machine anyway), and I just came back the next morning
to my new CentOS enterprise server. No issues.
Ben
- Re: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternatives? Nick Leverton
- Re: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternatives? John Hardin
- Re: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternatives? Burnie
- RE: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternatives? Smart,Dan
- Re: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternatives? Ben Hanson
- Re: OT: RedHat cutting off errata support, Alternati... Bart Schaefer
