On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Joe Klemmer wrote: > Slackware. There's just to much missing from it. I know it can do the > job just fine but the maintenance of a Slack box is astronomical > compared to any of the other distros. You would probably be better actually no, its about the same as RH. > > > > I do not know what checking process is in place now with this 'open co > > munity' bullshit but its F'in pathetic QC compared to the old. > > So far I've found the quality of packages in FC1 to be a bit better > than RH 9, but YMMV. reliability + stability = RH of old. fedora reminds me of NT, for desktops its fine, but forget any REAL server use. we had 7.3 boxes running untill recent that NEVER missed a beat, never had to touch them,, like the RH9 boxes we have.... since fedora went on the 7.3 boxes, well, what a nightmare, daily interventions. I know of others who were running 7.3 samba servers, fedora destroyed it, they gave up and reinstalled 7.3 and backups from tape, they have told me they will not touch it again either. I know RH engineers work on this project, but the QC crew sure as hell dont, if they did FC1 WOULD be as relaible and stable as previous RH's. -- Regards, Res
