On 05/06/03 Kevin McKinley did speaketh:
> This release cycle is very different from the last one, because of the big
> changes in glibc and gcc.
>
> I used Woody for a year before it was released and was never bitten. With
> Sarge I've needed to be careful about what I update and when.
>
> I ex
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 11:02:30 -0400
"Michael P. Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was using Debian on all my boxes up until a couple of weeks ago,
> when upgrading X in testing fried my X configuration and I had to start
> over. I guess it needed more testing. :) I'm going to play with a
On 05/06/03 Sven Hoexter did speaketh:
> Hey,
> apt-rpm works nice and there are several free repositorys with add-on
> packages for RH.
>
> www.freshrpms.net is apt-get able
And it has a poor selection by comparison to Debian. Very simple
things, like IceWM, are not available. Also, you can
On 05/06/03 Aryan Ameri did speaketh:
> RedHat does not have apt. apt was ported to support RPM long ago by
> Connectiva. Now, you can manualy go and install apt on major RPM based
> distros, like RedHat, SuSE and Mandrake. But, apt-rpm (as it is called)
> does not enjoy the advantages that it
On 05/06/03 bob parker did speaketh:
> But during the course of it all it became very clear to me. With Debian if /
> when you get anything working it is because you found out what you had to do
> and did it. Sometimes that might be a little difficult but you have this list
> for support along
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 05:20, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> first of all, I'm not definetely willing to start a war here (although I
> think I have already). :-) I'm a very satisfied and enthusiastic Debian
> user, but I would like to hear from you guys the essential pros and cons
> of eac
>> On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 14:20, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
>
> and it was completely useless. Because the
> repositories are so small (again, because the original company does not
> support it), that it is useless. Only a hanfull of applications, can
> work with apt-rpm.
It really depends, I use
On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 09:35:05AM +0300, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 14:20, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> > > the essential pros and cons of each of the distributions. I'm
> > > asking because for me the best thing about Debian (besides others)
> > > is the package manager system
> On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 14:20, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > first of all, I'm not definetely willing to start a war here
> > (although I think I have already). :-) I'm a very satisfied and
> > enthusiastic Debian user, but I would like to hear from you guys
> > the essential pro
The advantage of Red Hat is commercial support and easy installation.
The advantage of debian is a truly stable platform with thousands upon
thousands of apps compiled for it.
Red Hat actually does have people you can call and talk with for help
installing or configuring a supported application.
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 03:20:35PM -0400, Bruno Diniz de Paula wrote:
> first of all, I'm not definetely willing to start a war here (although I
> think I have already). :-) I'm a very satisfied and enthusiastic Debian
> user, but I would like to hear from you guys the essential pros and cons
> of
It's not just the package manager (dpkg/APT) but also the official
Debian APT repository. You'd be hard pressed to find another distro
with so much software available in one place. RedHat may be coming out
with a better package manager but unless they have the repository of
9000+ packages to go w
12 matches
Mail list logo
