On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 03:49, Michael Andreen wrote: > I moved to cooker a month or two ago and it's been a very nice ride so far, > it's not much that I miss in it.. ;)
Consistence and stability perhaps, other than that I like mandrake because it had most of the apps I regularly use, I'm an ex Redhat user, and maybe that distro has matured since then, but at the time I was using it I still had to dowload lots of stuff from the net which were standard issue on Mandrake. > Sure there are some things that get wrong once in a while, but of what I've > seen they get solved rather quickly (as long as someone bothers to report it, > if it isn't reported then it's hard to solve the problem since it's hard > enough to find it in the <insert HUGE number> possible configurations). > Just continue reporting problmes, that's what's really needed and if noone > responds then complain about the lack of response since good reporting and > good response is what's needed (and of course some action from the responding > part) to get rid of the flaws. Well, I am pretty new to this list, but I don't mind reporting bugs n' all that, it's just that right now I don't have the time due to exams. But I just notice the sharp contrast between cooker which slowly tears my system apart, constantly has something broken and is full of conflicting packages and the happy sid boxes at home which have not had any problems yet. <snip> > kvirc 3, even though it isn't released as stable yet, is a very nice client > (that beats everything I've seen so far on both linux and windows) and I've > been running selfcompiled versions for about 5 months now. > Sure it would be nice to have this packaged for cooker (who maintained kvirc2? > maybe time for me to learn how to create rpms?? ;), In fact, it ain't that hard. Just read the cooker docs on the cooker site. However, I noticed that whenever I make a spec file it doesn't look nearly as big and complicated than the mandrake ones, but hey, it builds, it installs and it runs. Good enough for me, but not for public release. ;) > but it's not hard at all > (if you got some experiance of compiling) to either check out the latest cvs > snapshot or download a snapshot from ftp://ftp.kvirc.net if you don't want to > mess with the auto* tools. Will do; I don't mind getting down and dirty with CVS every now and then when a package isn't provided by my distro, but if it is I'd rather have it installed as a package instead of just source. Anyway, thanks for the kvirc hint; it still doesn't fix all the stuff that's broken on my box. I understand making a distro is not an easy task; everything needs to work together, sometimes unpredictable problems may arise which break stuff, etc... But then again, if another distro can pull it off, so can Mandrake. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone; I have no right to since I am not a mandrake packager who has proven himself to always deliver bug-free packages. I am just looking at the facts and realising that with mandrake you have 2 choices: either you don't upgrade untill the next stable distro hits the shelves (apart from the security updates that is), or you upgrade and have lots of stuff broken. It would be nice to see a third Mandrake incarnation which consists of tried-and-true cooker packages, so that users can have relatively new versions of their favourite software, but also can rest assured that there are no problems with the packages. Coz waiting till the next Mandrake hits the shelves is just too damn long. ;-) kind regards, -- Rial Juan <http://nighty.ulyssis.org> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 20135549 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Belgium tel: ++3289856533 cellular: ++32496737018 ulyssis student services <http://www.ulyssis.org> This message will self-destruct when raped by leprechauns...
