4 ms·

Having worked with both, and been intimately involved in package/repository creation and maintenance, I would have to disagree completely. I'm not sure how you

Having worked with both, and been intimately involved in package/repository creation and maintenance, I would have to disagree completely. I'm not sure how you were managing it, but I've installed very large bases if redhat systems, from dozens of individually configured systems to clusters of thousands of nodes. I would say that neither are too difficult for general deployment, but redhat's kickstart system had a leg up on Debian for years. I'd also say that the yum/rpm repository system is far easier to manage. Setting up internal repos, and making custom packages takes so much less work in the redhat ecosystem, because the sets of tools are much better integrated. Setting up a custom signed apt repo takes a lot more work, and research into various sources of documentation. Don't even get me going on trying to sign and verify a deb on it's own.

pythonist 14y ago
This sounds more that your experience with Debian tools is much weaker then with RHEL based ones. The discussion on this is endless, both systems have advantages, I just prefer Debian from majority of reasons.
- ominous_prime 14y ago
  I was more or less responding to the focus of your comment being: > "Having to reinstall 100+ servers from CentOS 5 to CentOS 6 will be remembered as the lowest point in my work experience so far." I've worked with both very extensively, I just don't see this as the case at all if one is well prepared, and wanted to point out that RHEL systems aren't lacking in that respect. I have numerous ubuntu systems that are lined up for a 10.04 -> 12.04 upgrade, and I don't see it as being any more or less difficult than the RHEL 5 -> 6 transitions I've done, just different.
  - pythonist 14y ago
    The difference is that reinstallation requires more work and it is more difficult then upgrades. What I wanted to say is that I would recommend everyone to try to avoid massive reinstallations between RHEL clones major versions, especially if you are supporting large number of services and fast development cycles,

pythonist 14y ago

This sounds more that your experience with Debian tools is much weaker then with RHEL based ones. The discussion on this is endless, both systems have advantages, I just prefer Debian from majority of reasons.

ominous_prime 14y ago
I was more or less responding to the focus of your comment being: > "Having to reinstall 100+ servers from CentOS 5 to CentOS 6 will be remembered as the lowest point in my work experience so far." I've worked with both very extensively, I just don't see this as the case at all if one is well prepared, and wanted to point out that RHEL systems aren't lacking in that respect. I have numerous ubuntu systems that are lined up for a 10.04 -> 12.04 upgrade, and I don't see it as being any more or less difficult than the RHEL 5 -> 6 transitions I've done, just different.
- pythonist 14y ago
  The difference is that reinstallation requires more work and it is more difficult then upgrades. What I wanted to say is that I would recommend everyone to try to avoid massive reinstallations between RHEL clones major versions, especially if you are supporting large number of services and fast development cycles,