Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
Chris wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:27:10 +0200 Peter Kjellstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 25 July 2007, Dave K wrote: On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, They are kept functional and secure. I think that is enough in many cases. If someone really needs a special app they can always compile it and/or install it in their $HOME. /Peter You are assuming of course that these end users are NOT Windows users. I tried Cent as an alt-desktop for our users. It lacks big time what the end user needs without the IT department getting involved and installing for the end user. IMHO, what Cent ought to do - is some how get hand on the RHEL Desktop and see what's done there and work along those lines. U In versions of RHEL that are = 4 ... RHEL Desktop is a watered down version of RHEL. CentOS contains all packages that are RHEL proper ... which contains all packages in RHEL Desktop. = In RHEL 5 ... the Client/Workstation version does contain some packages that are not in the server version ===HOWEVER=== CentOS contains all the packages that are in BOTH versions. Therefore, CentOS does contain all the packages that are in RHEL Desktop. The only exceptions are packages that are not redistributable .. and those do not come on RHEL CDs, but are only available via RHN ... things like Java, FlashPlayer, etc. Thanks, Johnny Hughes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
I'm running CentOS on my server and I don't feel it makes a great desktop since several of the major applications (OpenOffice, Firefox, etc) lag behind since it follows RHEL. I prefer to use something more dynamic and current on the desktop. Thanks, Scott On 7/24/07, beast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I would like to deploy centos on hundreds of client PC (a new setup). Presently, several distros has attract me due to their focus on the desktop, however they only have few months lifetime before a new version released. Is it advisable using centos on client? what about support for new hardware and several office productivity software like openoffice, did centos always update to the latest version? Previously i was using RH9 on several hundreds clients and love it, however the update was horrible since it is unsupported, hence I can not install it on the new hardware (ie. sata) thanks. --beast ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
Scott Moseman wrote: I'm running CentOS on my server and I don't feel it makes a great desktop since several of the major applications (OpenOffice, Firefox, etc) lag behind since it follows RHEL. I prefer to use something more dynamic and current on the desktop. Would you say the same if you had to herd several hundred desktops? I really do see CentOS (especially 5) as a viable alternative there. Cheers, Ralph pgpnf34ToL8Ub.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
RE: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Moseman Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:24 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable? I'm running CentOS on my server and I don't feel it makes a great desktop since several of the major applications (OpenOffice, Firefox, etc) lag behind since it follows RHEL. I prefer to use something more dynamic and current on the desktop. snip I too feel that while CentOS is fantastic on my servers, it lags behind a little too much for my desktop needs. Here I use Fedora Core 6 on my desktops which has fully matured, and I suspect when it reaches end-of-life then Fedora Core 7 will have fully matured. I use rapid software deployment, PXE/RIS, to deploy my OS and perform a staggered install of a portion of my desktops Windows/Linux every year. Since moving to Windows terminal servers for 2/3 of my Windows users though I have not had to do that much on the Windows side. -Ross __ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:47:17 +0200, Ralph wrote: Scott Moseman wrote: I'm running CentOS on my server and I don't feel it makes a great desktop since several of the major applications (OpenOffice, Firefox, etc) lag behind since it follows RHEL. I prefer to use something more dynamic and current on the desktop. Would you say the same if you had to herd several hundred desktops? I really do see CentOS (especially 5) as a viable alternative there. I agree. I don't like CentOS on the desktop, but if I had to manage several hundred workstations, CentOS' 5-year update cycle would make it a hands-down winner. Miark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
Ralph Angenendt wrote: Scott Moseman wrote: I'm running CentOS on my server and I don't feel it makes a great desktop since several of the major applications (OpenOffice, Firefox, etc) lag behind since it follows RHEL. I prefer to use something more dynamic and current on the desktop. Would you say the same if you had to herd several hundred desktops? I really do see CentOS (especially 5) as a viable alternative there. I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. Best, ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, perhaps in an alternative repo. And for supporting a large deployment, they need to be a repo, building/installing manually just isn't an option. -- Dave K Unix Systems Network Administrator Mount Laurel NJ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
On Wednesday 25 July 2007, Dave K wrote: On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, They are kept functional and secure. I think that is enough in many cases. If someone really needs a special app they can always compile it and/or install it in their $HOME. /Peter perhaps in an alternative repo. And for supporting a large deployment, they need to be a repo, building/installing manually just isn't an option. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:27:10 +0200 Peter Kjellstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 25 July 2007, Dave K wrote: On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, They are kept functional and secure. I think that is enough in many cases. If someone really needs a special app they can always compile it and/or install it in their $HOME. /Peter You are assuming of course that these end users are NOT Windows users. I tried Cent as an alt-desktop for our users. It lacks big time what the end user needs without the IT department getting involved and installing for the end user. IMHO, what Cent ought to do - is some how get hand on the RHEL Desktop and see what's done there and work along those lines. -- Best regards, Chris Registerd Linux user number 448639 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
Dave K wrote: On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, perhaps in an alternative repo. And for supporting a large deployment, they need to be a repo, building/installing manually just isn't an option. Man, you have the Centos plus repo, and if that does not make you happy, you have all the tools you need to roll your own repo. What is this about building/installing manually? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
--- Timothy Selivanow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 11:21 -0700, Steven Vishoot wrote: hello, i am not sure if this is a concern, but if you are running x86_64 desktop systems then i would suggest putting the 32 bit centos. this will make life a lot more pleasant for you when installing firefox and other apps. if it is x86 then carry on :) my .02 cents Steven I have not run into any problems using 64bit as my desktop (I run Firefox as 32bit to get flash to work, but that is the only modification). I do this both at home and at work. Granted, I use Fedora 7 on both of them, but there is no reason why you couldn't get the same functionality using CentOS. I'm not afraid of compiling or rebuilding RPMs though. Between Karanbir's RPM repository ( http://centos.karan.org ) and EPEL ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL ) I imagine that you could have a fairly complete desktop OS (I just prefer more bleeding-edge software/features). -- Timothy Selivanow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux System Administrator EasyStreet Online Services, Inc. http://www.easystreet.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos hello timothy, i understand what your saying with only having a few desktops you can do that with little troubles. the original poster has a lot (hundreds) to deploy and i was only suggesting that for ease of support. as i have seen a few post on the list about the trouble of using 64 bit on desktop. that is why i suggested that version. Steven Get your Art Supplies @ www.littleartstore.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
My recommendation: CentOS 5 --or-- Ubuntu LTS Cheers, Devin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
--- Feizhou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave K wrote: On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I don't see any real showstoppers that would prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are a few extras that I'd want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't beat the cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a stick. I agree, but I think the earlier comments have some validity though. It would be far more useful if certain key apps (e.g. FireFox and OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own key app list) were kept up-to-date, perhaps in an alternative repo. And for supporting a large deployment, they need to be a repo, building/installing manually just isn't an option. Man, you have the Centos plus repo, and if that does not make you happy, you have all the tools you need to roll your own repo. What is this about building/installing manually? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos hello, i am not sure if this is a concern, but if you are running x86_64 desktop systems then i would suggest putting the 32 bit centos. this will make life a lot more pleasant for you when installing firefox and other apps. if it is x86 then carry on :) my .02 cents Steven Get your Art Supplies @ www.littleartstore.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos as a desktop, advisable?
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 11:21 -0700, Steven Vishoot wrote: hello, i am not sure if this is a concern, but if you are running x86_64 desktop systems then i would suggest putting the 32 bit centos. this will make life a lot more pleasant for you when installing firefox and other apps. if it is x86 then carry on :) my .02 cents Steven I have not run into any problems using 64bit as my desktop (I run Firefox as 32bit to get flash to work, but that is the only modification). I do this both at home and at work. Granted, I use Fedora 7 on both of them, but there is no reason why you couldn't get the same functionality using CentOS. I'm not afraid of compiling or rebuilding RPMs though. Between Karanbir's RPM repository ( http://centos.karan.org ) and EPEL ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL ) I imagine that you could have a fairly complete desktop OS (I just prefer more bleeding-edge software/features). -- Timothy Selivanow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux System Administrator EasyStreet Online Services, Inc. http://www.easystreet.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
