input needed on Debian

[Leon A. Goldstein]

Dallam Wych wrote inter alia::

> > Libranet is fast and easy to install, so there is little excuse for not
> > installing a "lab rat" install and testing unstable updates on it before
> > going to town on the installation that earns its keep.
>
> I have read your praise of libranet in several of your last posts,
> and it got me curious enough to get ahold of the 2.7 release and
> install it on a spare dell p2 machine.
> Actually, I didn't see anything that remarkable about it. The
> install was over simplified, much more so than to my liking and at
> the end of the day one can always download some nice backports from
> backport.org or dist upgrade to a combination of woody/sarge. I
> never found the woody install that difficult though for all the
> complaints there are from newbies about it.
> I also had a go with slack 9.1 this past week, and found it up to
> its usual excellent standards. FreeBSD 5.1 is going on one of the
> boxes here this week sometime, is anyone currently using it?
> comments?
>
The fact  that  Libranet 2.7 does not strike you remarkable is IMHO what
makes it so good.
It is a streamlined way for a RPM distro user to get into Debian, from
where you can go wherever you want;
either update to the point Libranet's identity is lost, or, as I do,
stick with the release's configuration, with only minor
changes.   Among the changes I do make are kernel recompiles, which
Libranet makes foolproof.
If you have no discomfort installing  traditional woody or sarge, then
Libranet probably is not going to be of much interest.

>
> > Powered by Libranet 2.8 Debian Linux
>
> Isn't that Debian GNU/Linux?
>
Could be.  That is only to remind me which of my systems sent the
original.
It also alerts my correspondents that they are receiving an e-mail from
a non-infectious computer.
BTW I have Libranet 2.8.1 as well, but have not gotten around to
transfering my e-mail archives to it.

Leon A. Goldstein

Powered by Libranet 2.8 Debian Linux
System LI