On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 04:52, Richard Kelsch wrote: > Ok people, I'm not trying to be a bummer here, so please read this as if > it was meant to entertain, not insult. Think of me as a whining comic. > However, there is a seriousness to the root of this message: > I like and want to use Linux, not spend hours working out problems in > getting it to work. BAD! BAD!! It's like buying a hydrogen powered > car. Sure, it's new, clean, and neato-keen with all the nerds out > there, but your screwed being to actually fill it with fuel. Shame on > you if you live outside of Seattle or San Francisco (Fanboy capitals of > the continent). Your new, bitchin' car is a brick. The same goes using > FC4 outside it's core software, your PC is a brick as well. Understand that FC is a test bed. Red Hat is using it as a rapid development platform. They will take the things that work and incorporate them into RHEL. FC is a time based release, it will have problems, guaranteed. It says this on the main fedora web site. If you want a Red Hat like system that is more stable you should try Centos. It is a rebuilt version of the latest RHEL. Currently it is roughly equivalent to FC3 at the moment. You will get a longer period of support with it and in most cases it should be more reliable. The next version will have many features of FC4 in it, and since those using FC4 will have sorted out most of the problems you won't have many of the issues you listed or the problems people are reporting here. If you just want to use Linux that is probably a better path than trying to use the latest and greatest Fedora release. And I have to ask, what prompted you to upgrade to FC4? If you had a perfectly working FC3 what features of FC4 did you want/need that prompted the upgrade? IMHO upgrading just to upgrade is not a good reason unless that is your thing. :) -- Scot L. Harris webid@xxxxxxxxxx In Newark the laundromats are open 24 hours a day!
