Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Good arguments to use Gentoo Linux?

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 1/22/07, Regis Decamps <decamps@××××××××.net> wrote:
> qfpvajdy wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> >
> > I would like to convince my boss and my collegues to use Gentoo GNU/Linux at the company office for the desktop system (and maybe one day also for servers).
> >
> > Currently everybody uses its own Linux/Unix system, but soon we could be forced to uses for everybody only one system.
> >
> > I must probably convince the people to use Gentoo Linux against RedHat Scientific Linux and FreeBSD.
> >
> >
> >
> > Does somebody has some good key arguments?
> >
> >
>
> No: I use Gentoo at home but could not imagine a place at my company.
>
> Gentoo requires a real internet connection when we are behind a
> restricted proxy

We are behind a restricted proxy in a secure environment at a govern
building, and yet I have a couple of servers and desktops running
Gentoo flawlessly for about an year.

>
> Gentoo requires a lot of administration. For instance: etc-update
> (dispatch-conf) needs to be run after a package upgrade

Only if you upgrade frequently, for ordinary use, you'll install and
upgrade specific packages, most do not require any intervention, while
when you decide to do a major upgrade you won't need a release CD with
lots of stuff you don't need, while burning your configs in the
upgrade process, besides you won't need to know the twelve packages
that will need upgrade to let you use the new/upgraded application.

>
> Gentoo takes time with compilation and requires fine tuning for things
> to work when we just a standard works-for-everybody application.

Time with compilation in a distributed environment with binary
packages is almost zero, if you want to, the fact is that Gentoo
serves ANY application, you just have to configure it ONCE and it's
ready for almost any environment. A bit of inicial tunning saves time
in a dozen later installs/upgrades.

>
> Gentoo is not appropriate for my company. Mandriva or Suse would be
> better choices.
>

For the above reasons, you should reconsider...

>
> >
> > The mines are:
> >
> > - newests packages with newests security updates, encryption support and full integreated KDE desktop to be used in office without problems
> >
>
> like any "desktop oriented" distribution. Red Hat, Suse and Mandriva,
> Ubuntu offer the same.

In fact, they don't, they offer releases, else you will have to use
their package management system to upgrade, and portage is the only
one who has never crashed on me beyond repair.

>
> > - high performance desktop
>
> Why do you compare only these three OS? Why is freebsd in this list?
>
> higher than the other Desktop distros?

I totally agree with that...

>
> In my opinion, Gentoo is not appropriate for most companies. Now it
> depends... What are your criteria?
>
> - support? Gentoo has a great community, but so do ubuntu or Mandriva.
> But Mandriva, Suse and red Hat offer paid support, ie someone to blame
> whan things don't work

You can buy support for Gentoo from any company that offers it, the
same as you can with almost any other distro...

> - configuration? Do you need fine configuration (gentoo wins)?

Easy configuration is better than fine, etc protection, rc-update,
portage itself, they're all systems that you can use to
distribute/automate configuration...

> - easyness or "put hands in the dirt"?

Gentoo is easy, you just have to get used to it, just like every other
distro out there...

> - cost of maintenance (I really doubt Gentoo wins)

It depends on the staff you have and/or the support you bought. Gentoo
has proven to be cheap and reliable.

-- 
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list