At 1:03 AM -0500 7/12/05, Mike McCarty wrote: >Ken Rambler wrote: > >> I'm sorta the new FC kid on the block and a little confused. The last >> version I used was RH9, very stable. How does FC3 and FC4 compare? >> Which would be best for a production server? >> >> All these comments have me on guard :-) >> >> -----Original Message----- >> *From:* fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Fred Morcos >> *Sent:* Monday, July 11, 2005 8:28 PM >> *To:* For users of Fedora Core releases >> *Subject:* Re: WARNING:DO NOT UPGRADE TO CORE 4 >> >> well, im not against steven, fc3 is way much better than fc4.. i >> still experience hell a lot of problems in fc4 even after >> upgrading the whole system.. i dont know why all this happened, is >> it such bad testing? or the fedora team giving up on the project?? >> things/problems that happen aren't suppose to be happening.. i >> mean, fedora core 4 till now cant be a usable system anywhere >> (home, office, server, etc..) >> no offence but i think that fc4 needs a lot more attention for the >> next 2 months to get everything tested, fixed and optimized as >> good as possible... >> im wishing them good luck >> -fred >> >Are these short lines? They sure got rewrapped for me. No, /those/ were "long lines" in the original messages from Ken & Fred, unlike the other messages you've cited. They're also both HTML, while the other messages you've complained about that I've checked have not been HTML, dunno what that means. ____________________________________________________________________ TonyN.:' <mailto:tonynelson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ' <http://www.georgeanelson.com/>
