On Sun, 11 Mar 2001, Ted Gervais wrote:
> > > Wolverine is a 'good-one' Philip. Sure a lot better than RH7. At least
> > > in my opinion.
> >
> > Could you elaborate a little on this? What is better about Wolverine that
> > wasn't as good in RH7?
>
> Well the way I see Wolverine as being better is that it seems to set itself
> up much better. You have TWO cdroms as did RH7 but Wolverine uses both of
> them. My RH7 didn't. It just used one.
In all fairness to the RH7 install, it would/could have used the second CD
if you went through the custom install and picked your packages, or even
in the other "standard" installs, you had the option to pick specific
packages. If you had picked packages which were on the second CD, you
would have been prompted for it (packages like the kernel headers, source,
tec).
> Then, when things are done (installed) everything seems to be ready to
> use. I had to fool around with a lot of little things with RH7, but
> not so with Wolverine. As well Wolverine comes with KDE 2.1beta2 and
> the upgrade to kde2.1 (stable) went without a hitch.
> All the way through both the installation of Wolverine and the running of it
> with various applications - was simpler and without a hitch!!
>
> Bottom line - it is smooth and like a dream to use..
Well, my server install went rather well, actually...but I'm looking at
building a dual processor server with ATA-100 and such. I'm looking
forward to trying Wolverine, or the subsequent "real" release, once it's
available and I have my hardware in place.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
