Re: UDB and Hamm? How stable is Hamm?
On Tue, Jun 09, 1998 at 09:42:19AM +0200, Frank Louwers wrote:
> How stable is Hamm for Alpha? I know it is still in frozen, and I heard
> some comments it not being ready enough. I am not a programmer, so I want
> to be able to run most of the programs without doing "crazy stuff".
I have run Debian/Alpha for more than a year. I've *never* had to
reinstall, etc. It's dead stable.
It's also quite useable---I recently decided to play around with alternate
window managers under X (which I use 8 hours a day, 5 days a week), used
dselect to browse through the available options, installed one or two,
played around with them, removed them, etc.
> Should I begin with Red Hat for Alpha, or is the frozen stable enough and
> go with that? Or is Debian 2 going to be released for Alpha in the nezt 2
> - 3 weeks?
Don't bother with RH---the release of Debian 2.0 for Alpha may lag a bit
compared to the Intel, but that is almost exclusively a matter of the fact
that we're perpetually playing catch-up. Every package on the FTP site that
I've installed in the last several months has simply worked. There are some
things that don't compile, but they're usually less-popular packages that
you wouldn't find under RedHat, either.
Mike.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: