news

[Net Llama!]

Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2002 18:38:40 -0700 "Net Llama!"
> <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:
> 
>>I wouldn't say that Redhat doesn't have a clue.  They just like to
>>make standards, rather than follow them.
>>
> 
> 
> I would call it "doing it their own damn way."  What they do
> (sometimes reluctantly) becomes standard just because everyone else
> gives up.

The LSB will put a stop to that.

>>I wouldn't touch Debian with a 10ft stick.  Way too many religious
>>zealots.
>>
> 
> 
> Total agreement, but lots of people like it.  It's really the
> "old-time religion," emphasis on o-l-d.  They do, of course, have a
> development branch.  I could never get one of their base installs to
> run on my machines.

Oh, I know alot of Debian die-hards as well.  They're great folks, but 
i'm not in the mood to deal with all the fanatacism that goes on around 
the Debian project.

>>Mandrake makes a nice desktop distro, or so i've heard, but its a
>>wee bit too unstable for my taste.  I mean, devfs as the standard???
>> What 
>>were they thinking?
> 
> 
> I guess I resemble that remark.  gentoo has been serving up devfs
> almost since day one, and I can't remember any failures due to devfs. 
> As I said in another post, once you get the arcane syntax down (gentoo
> does it for you), you forget that it exists.

Until devfs is removed from the kernel (which is quite likely to occur), 
and everyone is forced to convert /dev into whatever becomes the next 
trend.  My point was that devfs is not officially a stable solution.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
L. Friedman                       	       netllama at linux-sxs.org
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: 		    http://netllama.ipfox.com

   6:05pm  up 22 days, 59 min,  3 users,  load average: 0.10, 0.10, 0.09