-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 18 March 2004 21:42, Paul Johnson wrote: > "Matthew Joyce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I guess what I want to find out is, is there any reason why Debian would > > not be able to do the job that they are suggesting Redhat for, and what > > reasoning can I use to support my proposing Debian. > > This isn't something that we're going to be able to properly answer > without knowing what you're going to be using the system for, so > people with experience with what you're trying know to chime up. > > That being said, I'm not sure there's really anything that Red Hat > does that Debian doesn't do better beyond the initial installer. On > the other hand, you're an existing Debian user, so this is a > non-issue.
Paul, I haven't used the Red Hat installer, so I really can't compare. I found the new Debian Installer (both Beta 2 and Beta 3) incredibly easy to use, however. I even got a clean install without looking at any of the instructions (that was a test run. I was trying to see how intuitive it was). Remember that I'm a Debian newbie - although not a Linux newbie. Question: Is Red Hat *REALLY* that much easier to setup? It seems difficult to believe it could be. Note that I've never tried the old Debian installer. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAWm7XjeziQOokQnARAn9SAJ44MlNIy5fSNTJF8Y8Ja3WmaGugrgCgmg1T vYa0NAqxdvAjPgJD95OVAUU= =mmvA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
