> Hence RHEL is not quite as cool as debian agreed
> but in my opinion more stable and reliable. Hmm. I'm not sure there is anything more stable than Debian stable. Like, in the world. I run testing on my desktop and home server since they're still using like python 2.4 or so in stable. Yeah, we use blender for things from benchmarking to making 3D shorts all the time (3D renders are embarrassingly parallel, and provide a simple test case, useful for debugging distributed cpu management software). I always build/run from svn, and 2.49 has been rock solid for quite some time (enough for it to be the default in Debian testing, ubuntu 9.10 (probably older too), arch, and gentoo). But let's talk about htop (and friends) again. I have to grab somedude's rpm for that? I must admit i don't know much about package signing; are rpms from the two RHEL repos you mentioned signed? > While it is true that Debian has everything under the sun, a lot of packages > can't really be vouched for and are likely unmaintained. Okay, that's rarely the issue I suffer from: it's modern codes that go missing from the RHEL/SLES repos. Anyhow, I'll probably give the Fedora a try one of these days: I have very little against learning something new and comparing it against what I've currently got. And, it's been about long enough since last I labored through a RH-based install and struggled against all things rpm, so maybe they've gotten better. -- not sent from an iphwn Sent from Spanish Fork, UT, United States -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info (unsubscribe here): http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
