Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 00:13:27 -0700 From: Erik Steffl <steffl@bigfoot.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat Message-ID: <3F7BD017.3000409@bigfoot.com> In-Reply-To: <200310021641.57828.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> References: <Pine.LNX.4.50.0310012040460.811-100000@cdm01.deedsmiscentral.net> <200310012305.46092.tbstep@tampabay.rr.com> <3F7B9C62.30703@bigfoot.com> <200310021641.57828.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
JacobRhoden wrote: > On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 01:32 pm, Erik Steffl wrote: > >> both freeBSD and linux distros (most of them at least) give you >>choice what you install. Just because it's on CD does not mean it's > > > Yes, but RedHat installs piles more junk which you dont use.... (At least last > time I did an install about a year ago.. had things like gaim and other > things I dont even know what are for). you can pick what you want in the beginning (I don't remember exactly how flexibile it is so maybe you really installs more than you need). but nothing is really part of OS, everything is a package (rpm) so you can uninstall pretty much anything you want. different linux distros are different in this area, I know for a fact that mandrake is very flexible in what you need to install (I tried it fairly recently), debian is extremely flexible (you can get few tens of MB net install (I don't remember how much but it's a lot less than one CD), install that and from there you just pick packages you want (it also has some groups that you can install (server, workstation etc.) for people who do not want so much granularity). I just don't think that your fairly general statement about linux distros pushing kitchen sink on you while freeBSD being more traditional unix is true... erik
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F7BD017.3000409>