Mandrake may, in itself, be good - essentially as good
as Redhat but with different optimizations, but something
is different enough between them to make them incompatible,
which I dislike.
I do not recall the rpm other than that it was one of the
ubiquitous software sets like XFree or glibc, but I tried
replacing a few of my central RH rpms with those i586-
optimized versions from Mandrake. It screwed my system
overall but worse, one of these rpms wouldn't install
and produced a message that it required a Mandrake install!
What the hell is that about? I have NEVER come across
any message with any software package that I needed
to have a Redhat or Openlinux or Debian install. It's
one thing, quite appropriate, to get messages about
dependencies, it is NOT appropriate to state that I
must have a particular version of linux installed,
particularly when it IS a ubiquitous package otherwise.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Knews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 8:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Michael J. McGillick;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: recipient.list.not.shown
Subject: Re: Red Hat vs Mandrake
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Michael J. McGillick wrote:
> Evening Everyone:
>
> Not looking to start a flame war here. I've heard of Mandrake, and
that
> it uses i586 or i686 rpms. Anyone out there tried it or compared it
to
> Red Hat?
If you read deeper, you would have found that Mandrake *IS* Redhat's
distribution, but Mandrake redoes it to boot to KDE by default and a
few other
nice things, so they say. I did see good reviews about them. [...]
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
