Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 11:57:14 -0500 From: Adam Turoff <aturoff@isinet.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bsd vs. linux and NT chart Message-ID: <99Mar2.114516est.113920@pandora.isinet.com> References: <4.1.19990302092127.03ff9da0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brett Glass wrote: > > Good chart! I'd change the bottom left-hand box to say that > FreeBSD can install ITSELF across the Internet via a PPP > or direct Internet connection after you boot only one > floppy. As far as I know, none of the Linux distributions > is as easy to install this way. (Do continue to plug the > CD-ROMs too, of course.) I don't think that's strictly true. I have a friend who installed RedHat 4.x (maybe 3.x) over FTP a few years ago. These days, most distributions install off of a single floppy but may require a second floppy to do a network install (esp. with bizarre/non PCI ethernet hardware). I installed RH 5.0 this way about a year ago on a laptop that 2.2.5 didn't seem to like. Many linuxen still require 2 floppies to install on alien hardware, such as Alphas, etc. I think all of the major linux distributions can install over-the-wire these days. The interface may not be as intuitive or as highly publicized in the install docs, but it can be done. You could do _much_ worse. FreeBSD: ++ (can be done, single-floppy install) Linux: + (can be done, may require a second floppy) NT: -- (Must have CD + 3-4 floppies, + license number +...) > Also, you might mention that the 24/7 Linux support > companies are EXPENSIVE. Isn't 24x7 support expensive in general? -- Adam To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?99Mar2.114516est.113920>