IPCop vs Smoothwall

[Edward Norton]

Just to clear things up.

On 3/30/06, Eric Shubes <plug at shubes.net> wrote:
>
> > - Squid does transparent proxying so it can't be bypassed
>
> Web proxying is one (I think the only) feature of IPCop I'm not (yet)
> using. I'm not sure if there's really a difference here or not.


No difference, IPCop also uses Squid as its web proxy.

> I don't like Smoothwall for the following reasons:
> > - The OS is just plain weird.  Yes, it is Linux, but it does not look
> > like Debian, Slack nor any RH/Fedora derivitave.  I may be mistaken, but
> > it is different.
>
> So is IPCop. I haven't had to get into the internals though, so it
> doesn't really matter. Updates are through web browser function. The
> only reason I've had to ssh into the box is to change nic configuration
> or reset admin password.


IPCop is essentially the same as any other Linux system, minus a lot of
binaries and other pork. I forget what it was originally based off of,
whatever Smoothwall was based on (IPCop is a fork of SW). The only real
downside I've found in it's "internals" is its lack of the GNU compiler
collection, along with make and it's utils, which can make it more
complicated to manually add things to the system. Oh well, good thing we
have -static. ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.plug.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20060331/876c04c0/attachment.htm