Re: A case study of a new user turned off debian
On 03-Nov-03, 16:22 (CST), Erik Steffl <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Oh, not this crap again. Or perhaps you're contending that what is
> usefull for you is usefull for everybody.
No, I didn't, My point was to object to YOUR contention that anything
over 3 months old is "Useless". Woody Emacs works just fine. So does
GNOME 1.2. Not as pretty, perhaps, as 2.4, but it seems to start up a
hell of lot quicker. And Galeon 1.2.9 works a lot better than what's in
stable - more features (that I find useful, anyway), fewer bugs.
And I object to people who insist on installing 'unstable" and then
bitch when it breaks. There's reasons for testing, and the only way it's
worse than unstable (as some have said) is that you have build your own
security fixes. Hey, baby, such is life.
And for the record, you can get the vast majority of the new desktop
stuff from one or more backport repositories (see www.apt-get.org), all
with the safety of a stable libc.
The woody install instructions describe how to use an alternate kernel
for installation. There's absolutely nothing preventing you from making
a CD image with a newer kernel. If there's such a huge fscking demand
for it, why isn't it out there?
And yes, I'm going to continue to object everytime someone makes stupid
statements like "Woody is so old it's useless". That's just noise,
unless you add "... for purposes a, b, and c".
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net