Mandrake or Fedora?

[CLIFFORD ILKAY]

At 16:15 13/01/2004 -0500, Matthew Godycki wrote:
[snip]
>Obviously, Fedora is a choice, as is Mandrake seeing as it's rather 
>similar to RedHat.
>
>Do any of you have any opinions or suggestions when it comes to those two 
>distributions?

I have used Red Hat since version 4 and Mandrake since the first version 
but I have not touched Fedora and see no reason to. I would give the edge 
to Mandrake for a couple of reasons. First, in a word, urpmi. It is a 
wrapper around rpm that handles dependencies much better than straight rpm 
and will make your life easier. Second, if you prefer to use GUI tools for 
administration, the Mandrake Control Center has almost everything you need 
in one place and with every release, it only gets more polished.

If you are used to Red Hat, using Mandrake will not involve much of a 
learning curve. There are some differences in where files are, most notably 
for Apache 2, but those are minor issues that you can easily deal with. I 
have never encountered anything that I could not run on Mandrake that I 
could on Red Hat or vice versa so it really boils down to your preference.

If you really want to continue using Red Hat on servers though, you may 
want to look at White Box Linux <http://www.whiteboxlinux.org/>. It is a 
distribution that tracks Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 so I think that might 
be a more stable platform than Fedora, and perhaps Mandrake, upon which to 
base one's development efforts.

Regards,

Clifford Ilkay
Dinamis Corporation
3266 Yonge Street, Suite 1419
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M4N 3P6

Tel: 416-410-3326 

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml