[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!



Just to interject a point of view from someone who is running the
"newest available hardware", I have an Athlon with a LeadTek GeForce DDR
video card, IBM 13.5gb S.M.A.R.T. drives, and sensors on all vital systems
(temps, rpms, and voltages).  Potato is rock solid on the system - indeed,
potato and XFree 3.3.6 are *much* less flaky than Win98 (To be expected,
but the point is that potato is supporting the new hardware very well.)

Just how new is the hardware that we're afraid kernel 2.2 won't support?

Curious,

Steve


Ari Makela wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava writes:
> 
> >         It is a quality of imlementation issue. If we are seriously
> >  outmoded, we can't honestly say we are trying to be the best
> >  distribution out there. 
> 
> I must say I completely fail to understand your point. Quality has not
> very much to do with the fact how new the softare in an unix-system
> is. Debian GNU/Linux is a great operating system and I do believe
> that one of the reasons for the high quality is the fact that Debian
> is developed without unnecessary haste.
> 
> > Best means we at least try not to be several
> >  years behind other people.
> 
> Slink is a litlle more than a year old.
> 
> >         So is miscrosoft.
> >         Debian has a stated goal of trying to achieve technical
> >  excellence. Obsolescence is a factor.
> 
> Debian has been quite successful in that. I've run several servers for 
> years and there has been no major problems and it has caused much less 
> problems than HP-UX or NT4.
> 
> I feel that no operating system can be everything for everybody. Also, 
> I believe that you can choose either "bleeding edge software" or "high 
> quality software" but not both.
> 
> >  Josip> A lot of people (including me) run kernel 2.2 on slink
> >  Josip> machines just fine. 
> > 
> >         And the point is?
> 
> The point might be that Slink can be updated to use 2.2 kernels and
> other sofware which are not included. After all, quality software
> compiles usually quite effortlessy with ./configure, make and make
> install. 
> 
> All said, as an unix user I'm very programming and server orientated
> and I rather buy malt whiskey than newest available hardware. Someone
> with an Athlon or a very new video card might disagree with me.
> 












Attachment: pgpmV7js2a4eq.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: