Fedora stability
Karl Hakmiller
karlh at concentric.net
Wed Dec 31 16:30:08 UTC 2003
I, too, have been exploring alternatives since Rh's announcement. I had been
using Mandrake before I switched to RH about a year ago (first 8.2 and then
9.0 - which I'm now using). I've been very pleased with RH from the start
and kept current with all the updates in kernel and apps as they came along.
A piece of cake to maintain.
As a trial I ordered the Debian CDs (Woody, not Sarge) and gave the
installation a try. Major pains followed. After the third attempt to
install Debian (not as a dual-boot but all by itself on a Pentium II 300 MHz
80 Gig Dell machine I'd been running the RH on), I finally gave up after
messy failures. I reinstalled the RH 9.0 from original CDs, updated
everything with apt-get and was back in operation in just over an hour.
It's possible that I received bad CDs from the online source for my Debian
OS and I may yet give it another try with isos I download myself but I did
notice this difference between the RH and Debian installs: My one semi-correct
install of Debian was incomplete in that the Network did not install (I could
not get the system to recognize the NIC) and in RH that was never a problem).
I've read the RH docs on installing Fedora and with this history of Debian
problems, I'd sure appreciate any "heads-up" warnings that are not mentioned
in those docs from those on this list who have installed Fedora from the
isos.
Thanks in advance.
Karl L
On Wednesday 31 December 2003 10:38, Krikket wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Haney wrote:
> > Okay, kind of a stupid and maybe useless question, but as I"ve been
> > really tinkering with (gasp!) SUSE, I'm kind of wondering how stable FC1
> > really is? I mean I realize there are issues, otherwise this list
> > wouldn't be very useful, but how well does it work as a Workstation (not
> > server) as compared with any other distros especially RH9?
>
> I can't compare to RH9, but I *can* compare it to SuSE 9.0
>
> Don't switch to SuSE. Trust me on this one. Baaad juju. After seing
> what was available, I decided to go with SuSE for my first real exposure
> to Linux in 6+ years. (And I had no experience with a Linux GUI at that
> point.)
>
> If you needs are met 100% by what's available on the distro CDs, then SuSE
> could work for you. But adding anything else? Damn near impossible.
> There are some things I *couldn't* get installed under SuSE, that were a
> breeze with Fedora. I'm not the only one wih those problems either.
>
> On the positive side, there are more GUI controls for things. So if
> that's what you're looking for, then maybe it's for you.
>
> Also you can *forget* right now about editing files by hand and expecting
> them to stay that way, and work correctly. The SuSE likes to rewrite
> stuff on you without warning.
>
> In short, the problems I had with SuSE 9.0 were great enough that I
> abandoned it, even though I paid the $80 for the Professional version.
>
> Using Fedora, I've had a *lot* fewer problems.
>
> Krikket
>
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list