I've found that LM7.1 to be far less troublesome than
7.2, especially during installation (7.2 always gives
me a blank screen/freezes during the X part of the
install). Then again, I use gnome and enlightenment
--which are packaged better on 7.1 as well imho.
MandrakeUpdate works fine, after fine tuning the
package selection, I can compile things (like
apache/php) to my liking w/o errors. I'm using the
supplied secure kernel, as well as fine tuning
security elsewhere.
Honestly, LM7.1 falls in the same category as the
respected "stable" RH6.2, except LM7.1 provides many
more features, easy of use, and customization than
RH6.2. LM7.2 is much more like RH7 in that, out of
the box you're going to have a lot of work to do
before you reach a "stable" (and useable!) system.
--- Larry Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > LM7.2. But, I think my point is still valid for a
> lot of people's
> > upgrades.
>
> No doubt about it Victor, I maintain a box for
> playing. My comments
> were related to the difficulties of getting version
> 7+ of ANY
> operating system to do basic things without having
> to relearn the
> entire operating system, read volumes on a dozen
> websites and hope and
> pray that you can fix things with a bunch of
> patches. The Linux world
> has bad-mouthed Microsoft for releasing buggy
> programs and that's
> certainly justified. BUT, Microsoft has always come
> along quickly
> with updates and something like W'98 was followed
> quickly with minor
> revision releases. Where's the "minor revision
> release" from ANY of
> the LINUX distro people? It's not even in their
> vocabulary. There
> are all sorts of things that could be stabilized in
> 7.2 and updated
> isos made available. I dare say that the folks at
> Mandrake are
> running exactly such systems on a daily basis. And
> yet there's no
> effort to actually do those updates other than
> through the update
> facility which seems to have problems of its own :-)
>
>
> I will give them this, the 7.2 updater is a
> bazillion miles ahead of
> the one that came with 7.1. But since I can't even
> do an expert
> install that runs to completion it doesn't do me a
> lot of good.
>
> > I think stability and featurefulness needs a
> different approach.
>
> Yep...and that, I guess, is my basic point. That
> approach is
> non-existent in the current Linux community once you
> get just a couple
> bytes above the kernel.
>
> > The legendary linux stability meant stability of
> the kernel. The stable
> > kernel. Not all the programs, desktops, and new
> programs from
>
> If that's true then "world domination" is
> meaningless. Taking even a
> small bite out of the Windows world is unreasonable.
> I would grant
> that the folks working close to the kernel are
> properly managing
> development, stability, etc. But when I hand a
> system to a guy and he
> then starts asking me why version 0.1 of this or
> that utility doesn't
> work, it suggests to me that there's a problem of
> another sort with
> this development model. Imagine how popular Windows
> would be if
> Microsoft bundled up half a dozen CDs of any and all
> of the small
> Visual Basic hacks that have been done and called it
> part of their
> package? This is what the Linux community is trying
> to do right now,
> mostly without a need to do so other than to feed
> "1300 programs" and
> "New" and other lines on a shrinkwrap box.
>
> > cooker. And probably not CUPS, either. Debian is
> considered one of
>
> An operating sytem without a stable print facility
> is not a desktop
> operating system in this day and age. It's that
> simple.
>
> > the most stable and featureful linux distros. They
> stick to
> > software, installation methods, desktops which are
> usually found in
> > Mandrake distros like 6.2 -7.0. And yes, if you
> want cool stuff to
>
> Yep, and if I didn't feel that sometimes "best"
> doesn't win the race
> in the computer game I might give it a try. But it
> seems to me that
> the die is cast that the side of the street that
> Mandrake and Red Hat
> are on will be where the majority will live. Then
> again, I've been
> wrong before :-)
>
> > be working on your linux, you may have to tweak a
> little bit to make it
> > stable or usable. Sorry...
>
> Understand Viktor that I realize completely that if
> I want a very
> stable system I can get it. I'll just reload Red
> Hat 6.2. My
> statements are more couched in the vein that one of
> two things need to
> happen. Either the distro people need to spend more
> time stabilizing
> things or the Linux community should stop even
> giving a hint that
> Linux is an operating system that anyone but a
> seasoned computer jock
> is going to be able to use. Right now the rhetoric
> of this community
> doesn't fit its footsteps. Either could be out of
> whack, I'm not in a
> position to answer that.
>
> The thing I find odd is that I don't think anyone in
> the Linux
> community ever figured that it might be the
> distribution companies
> that would be the major stumbling block in putting a
> stable Linux on a
> secretarie's desktop...but it is. Let me provide an
> example here.
> Anyone who's read this conference knows of the
> problems associated
> with v7.2. We also know of the great Mandrake
> Cooker and realize
> there are guys working very hard...on something.
> But if I download a
> Cooker install do I get improved stability?
> No...what I get are more
> features. Can I go to the Mandrake site and get a
> fix for my
> installer problems with 7.2? No. So, willing or
> not to spend time, I
> struggle to have 7.2 running 100% on my system and I
> can't even
> imagine what all those people who received Mandrake
> Complete 7.2 for
> Xmas are going to do.
>
> > Just an example: For a really stable KDE desktop,
> you probably have
> > to stick to KDE 1.2...Until all the fixes for KDE
> 2.0 come out.
>
> Here again, I have improved stability considerably
> by installing
> KDE2.1. Is the secretary I mentioned above going to
> do that? Are the
> bunch of guys I've got running Mandrake around here
> going to do that
> when they're still calling me to ask how they can
> create and icon? If
> we were talking about Windows, KDE2.1 would be
> available as an
> automatically update with a simple log on to their
> site. What have we
> got? We've got Chris doing it out of the goodness
> of his heart, not
> Mandrake having any protocol to provide it. This is
> a major
> stabilization of a product that Mandrake is selling,
> RIGHT NOW as
> though it's a functional replacement for Windows.
>
> > Well, I have to admit, I switched to linux some 4
> years ago not
> > because of stability, but couriosity and because I
> allways change
> > stuff on my computer, try out things. I got bored
> with Windows, it
> > was closed I knew it, it was not interesting any
> more. It did not
>
> And I'm a diehard Unix liker. But I'm also a guy
> who has to do work
> with his computers and a guy who doesn't feel his
> entire life should
> revolve around upgrading this or that. But what you
> and I are doesn't
> matter in the scheme of things. It's what the
> people arethat the
> Linux community is purporting to be trying to win
> over and they're
> neither willing or able to deal with this stuff.
> It's the distro
> people who are supposed to be putting together
> stable,
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
