>From a stability standpoint 1.2 and 1.3 totally rocked. It bugged me that the glibc issues made my boxes totally incompatible with everyone else's, but judging from the wailing RH users were doing about the early glibc2 releases I'm really glad I missed that evilness.
On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 16:57, Bob Hemus wrote: > Kurt Wall wrote: > > > > Scribbling feverishly on May 22, Stuart Biggerstaff managed to emit: > > > At 01:47 PM 5/22/02 -0700, Bill Campbell wrote: > > > >The release order of the 2+ versions we've used as I remember it was: > > > > > > > >OpenLinux 2.2 # we skipped this one -- rushed to make the first LinuxWorld > > > >OpenLinux 2.3 > > > >eServer 2.3 # last to use LILO > > > >eDesktop 2.4 # first to use GRUB > > > > > > ...also when they replaced KPPP with KsaferPPP, as I recall? And it was > > > between 2.x and 3.x they brought out LTP. With that, I wonder if the > > > "perfect" distro people are remembering isn't kind of a combination of 2.3, > > > 2.4 and LTP, as some started losing patience with Caldera at 2.4, while > > > others held on till the 3.1 controversy. > > > > Of all the releases, I preferred eDesktop 2.4 the most. > > > > Kurt > > -- > Did you folks forget about COL 1.3? > Bob > -- > A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well, > than a fool can see from a mountain top. > Unknown > _______________________________________________ > Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users > Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
