Debian 3.1

[David Bandel]

On 6/13/05, Net Llama! <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, David Bandel wrote:
> 
> > On 6/13/05, Matthew Carpenter <matt at eisgr.com> wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > Anyone have experience?  How is it?  Compare it to Red Hat and Ubuntu?
> >
> > Yes.
> > Works well.
> > Comparison of Debian to RH:  RH uses RPM.  Debian uses deb.
> > Comparison of Debian to Ubuntu:  Ubuntu is Debian derivative.
> > My take:  Linux is Linux is Linux.  At the /etc and vi level, all look
> > about the same.  In fact, at this level, I have a hard time
> > discriminating between Linux and most any other UNIX (Slowaris, HP-UX,
> > AIX, etc.).
> 
> There are alot of significant differences *especially* at the /etc level
> between Debian and RH.  About the only place that they look the same is
> when you're using end-user apps.

????

I have found almost no difference between Debian's
/etc/bind/named.conf (even though they "include" named.conf.options
and named.conf.local) and RH's /etc/named.conf files for BIND9.  In
fact, in vi, they look identical.

Ditto for sendmail.mc and aliases; lots more dittos for
/etc/X11/xdm|wdm files, and on and on.

And I can say the same about my Slackware boxes.

The only differences I see are when you _do_ use "end-user" apps for
administration of the files.  Except of course Webmin.

In fact, I can't find any differences between FreeBSD's
/etc/named.conf and those found on a Linux box (or Slowaris, etc.).

So just what exactly are you talking about?

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
            - Nemesis Air Racing Team motto