On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:00:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Darren Salt wrote: > >I demand that Anthony Towns may or may not have written... > >>Put them behind a firewall on a trusted LAN, use them to develop software > >>for arm chips, and then just follow unstable or run non-security-supported > >>snapshots. Apart from writing software for embedded arm things, I can't > >>see > >>the value > >"Linux desktop box" comes to mind... > > But why would you spend over 1000 pounds on an arm Linux desktop box > instead of a few hundred pounds on a random i386 desktop box?
Because you don't want a 100+W dissipating screaming monster on your desk ? > A reasonable answer is because you're developing for arm's for embedded > applications; but if so, what's the big deal with using unstable or > snapshots, and running your public servers on other boxes? Because using unstable is not a workable solution. Try to make a daily unstable install, and count how many days it is broken on the tier1 arches, and see how worse it can become on tier2 slower arches. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
