[ale] RedHat Enterprise vs. FreeBSD

[Mike Harrison]

> have never used a BSD installation.  RHEL seems pretty straightforward
> to patch, but I was told that FreeBSD was easier to maintain.  I need to
> know why and sound like I know what I am talking about ;) ...pj

That's a religious argument in the making with no clear 'right' answer. 
It depends on the skills of the relevant people. I'm working in a mixed 
BSD, Debian, RedHat and Ubuntu environment right now. (Ubuntu for 
Desktops, one Ubuntu LAMP Server) Joe, my fellow sysadmin is much better 
than I on BSD/FreeBSD and can make them sing and dance. I can do the same 
on RedHat. We are both about the same on Debian/Ubuntu.. him better at 
some things with it, me others.. 

I'd say, given equally talented sysadmins, fairly equal systems. 

If you are a begining sysadmin yourself, doing RedHat first
MIGHT be less painful to try, Ubuntu Server might be my next choice. 

But I have to chide you first with: You are asking the wrong question 
first.. or we are missing it.

  What do you want to USE it for? 
     a very simple LAMP Webserver  (Ubuntu LAMP Server..)
     a SAMBA Server, WinNT replacement  (RedHat ES)
     a router/firewall device (*BSD)
     a desktop  (Kubuntu or Ubuntu)
     a complex LAMP Server (Redhat or Debian..)

And for all of my examples above, everyone on this list
might prefer one *nix or another depending on their experience
and personal preferences. In the interest of keeping it simple, 
I used to use RedHat for -everything-...