I been working on CentOS ver.3 to ver 4 now, but u cant gurantee the relibilty of the system even its builded on the sources of the Ent Edition, Lots of minor bugs float around and timely relase of the patch from the community or from the ppl who maintain i, puts u in quite a quirky place, Even the CentOS formums are not alive and kicking what it should be, maybe it will be time where "white-box" can replace the ENT editions, but still my personal feeling, prodcution u cant mess with White-Boxes... --Darshan Jadav [root@devil] On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:39:10 -0500, Jason Dixon <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mar 14, 2005, at 8:02 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: > > > I heard White Box is "clone" of Redhat AS software. > > My company plan to switch from Redhat AS to White Box > > to save cost. What is opinion on White Box? > > I like WhiteBox but found that the errata maintenance experiences > unsatisfactory delays. I've migrated to CentOS and found they are much > more responsive to patch releases and community feedback. Both are > quality products; the differentiator is in the support. > > > Does it stable enough? how about upgrade and third > > party driver support (e.g. Qlogic card, EMC powerpath, > > ..) ? > > Third party drivers that work on RHEL should build and run fine on the > RHEL clones. > > -- > Jason Dixon > DixonGroup Consulting > http://www.dixongroup.net > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
