[This thread prolly belongs on -user more than -devel] On Wed, May 20, 1998 at 02:54:38AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > This is what I got from the Stampede's FAQ: > > How is Stampede Linux better than Debian Linux? > > + glibc2 in the standard distribution We're closer to standard release of hamm than they are of stampede. > + Up to date programs hello? what do they think dists/frozen and dists/unstable are? Up to date software that has not undergone the same exhaustive testing as the older stuff in dists/stable. =p > + PGCC for that added performance kick afaik, most packages do not NEED the optimization and there will be no noticable difference. Some things like perhaps high-bandwidth servers and the like would benefit, so why not use diversions and package optimized binaries? Debian might consider packaging pgcc, but I think if they did I would stick with egcs anyway. > + Package format that is very usable across other distrobutions I've yet to see any but the most minimal (ie 1-2 floppy) dists that couldn't handle an ar archive. However, I think it might be nice if a few things were handled in a more generic manner. Most paths could/should be relative to wherever the dist puts these kinds of files. That's half the battle to making dpkg more flexable to be compatible with other package formats right there. The other half I think would be for Debian and Redhat people to agree on what to call things like glibc so dependancies would be taken care of. => As much as I personally dislike the rpm format and program, it's really the standard method for finding "packages" (as opposed to plain slackware type tarballs w/o dependancy checking) in Linux. Does the stampede format even SUPPORT dependancies?
Attachment:
pgpUMK66GOI5_.pgp
Description: PGP signature