On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 10:57:06PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:25 -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 03:08:11AM +0000, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> [snip]
> > Oops. You jumped from "second most common" to "second most important", as
> > if they're synonymous. Maybe they are to some people, but that's not at all
> > beyond debate: AMD64 will probably be supported by all serious
> > distributions,
> > while Debian is, from what I recall, the *only* way to get a sensible Unix
> > installation on many of the less common systems.
>
> NetBSD?
'sensible'
<ducks>
That said, NetBSD often is not a good option, because they are mainly a
source-based operating system whereas Debian is not. This is not to say
that Debian is better than NetBSD, but both source-based and
binary-based operating systems have their merits.
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- with thanks to fortune
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
