[ale] Smoothwall 2.0 or IPCop 1.3.0?

[James Sumners]

I will probably go with IPCop for no other reason than the fact that the system
is based on LFS and not RedHat like Smoothwall.

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 22:16:45 -0500
John Wells <jb at devsea.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:54:05 -0500
> James Sumners <james at sumners.ath.cx> wrote:
> 
> > I am considering replacing a Linksys WRT54G with a Linux box. The Linksys is
> > working fine but it doesn't quite cut it. My question to you is, would you
> > recommend Smoothwall 2.0 over IPCop 1.3.0 or vice versa? 
> 
> I used to use Smoothwall, then switched to IPCop.  No opinion either way
> really, although I like the fact that IPCop is community supported and open. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale


-- 

I used to be interested in Windows NT, but the more I see of it the more it
looks like traditional Windows with a stabler kernel. I don't find anything
technically interesting there. In my opinion MS is a lot better at making money
than it is at making good operating systems.  -- Linus Torvalds
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available