> > Oh, please do tell why a graphical installer is a bad thing... especially
> > if it allows installation to a software RAID array.
>
> because it's bloat. 'plague from seattle' :)
> Better reason is that any distribution which insists on installing GUI's is
> quite useless when installing small boxes, routers etc.
I think that the real issue here is the fact that Linux distributions
are popping up to meet every need. There is great need for distros with
non-GUI installs. However, IMHO it is insane to insist that those who
are willing to put up with some "bloat" (compared to M$? What bloat?) to
get a nice "friendly" GUI install should be barred from doing so, or
even criticized. It does not reflect well on the Linux community.
Don't criticize the GUI distros, be grateful that we have the choice to
choose a distro that meets one's own needs.
M$ trys to be a one-size-fits-all OS. Its downsides can largely be
traced to that mentality. I love using Linux because I have a *choice*.
I have a small machine that runs as a firewall/router. No GUI installs,
please. For the workstations, a quick and drty GUI install is fine. I
usually install most everything on the development machines; overhead
for the GUI install is tiny in comparison. OTOH, some GUI installs fall
over on my laptop. No choice there.
This is why I use more than one distro -- I don't get hung up on one or
the other. Choose the right tool for the job.
We now return you to the regularly scheduled RAID discussions....
James
--
Running NT is like listening to Kenny G with a kazoo.
