Andreas-Johann Ulvestad wrote:
Red Hat Linux .0-releases have always been.. well... LOUSY. Sorry guys,
you've done an excellent job all these years, but it's a _well known_ fact
that you never ever run .0-releases.

Actually I would call it a "well known superstition".


It may have been true historically that RedHat's .0 release were
often buggier than, say, their .1 or .2 releases, but that was
due to a combination of RedHat's change-control policies and
dumb luck.  Personally I thought 8.0 was no more buggy than 7.3,
actually, at least on servers where the UI changes were irrelevant.
Seemed pretty solid, actually.

A Linux distro is an agglomeration of a large number of Open Source
and Free software packages, all evolving at different rates and
getting less (and more) buggy at different rates.  Yet to combine
them into something that works well together you often /have/ to
upgrade individual packages that you'd rather leave alone, even
to less stable newer versions.  This stuff is /hard/.

I believe that how well a given release worked depended much more
on what you were using it for than the version number.  Sure, if
the kernel went to a new major version, which usually happened in
a .0 release, then the overall chances of problems are greater for
more types of uses.  But note that neither 8.0 nor "9" have a new
kernel major version.

RedHat is changing the way their numbering their releases.  Good
time to get over your superstition.  ;-)

Almost everyone I know will have a
..0-release running on a test system, but never ever run it on a
workstation or server. NEVER servers.

Amazing how many people are superstitious. *grin*


:j




-- Phoebe-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list

Reply via email to