I read in some of the reviews(CPU Review, LinuxWorld) that Mandrake 6.0 has
actually been optimized to run on Pentium and higher chips, yielding a 10-30%
performance increase over Red Hat.
Victor
Aaron deRozario wrote:
> My understanding is that the main difference is packageing. Having said
> that Red Hat 6.0 uses a different kernel (2.2.5 I think). Mandrake uses
> 2.2.9 which has a few security problems in it. On the Mandrake updates page
> it says that you need to upgrade the kernel in order to prevent a potential
> network security flaw.
>
> IF you are not going to be using a GUI (KDE integration is teh most
> noticeable difference between the two diatributions) it probably doesn't
> matter which one you use.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 18 August 1999 12:14
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [newbie] Mandrake v. Red Hat - How close is close?
> >
> > I just told a Unix guy I know I was going to try and use Mandrake for
> > doing
> > some Web serving. He told me that he doesn't know that much about Linux,
> > but that he'd heard Red Hat was the way to go for serving, because their
> > socket layers were better.
> >
> > I imagine this is a debatable claim, but that's neither here nor there.
> > I'm
> > writing, because my understanding is that mandrake is just Red Hat with a
> > better install program and some other stuff, but that the underlying code
> > is identical. My friend's comment, though, made me want to question this.
> > So is the only difference between REd Hat and Mandrake 'packaging', or am
> > I
> > wrong?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris
