Fedora stability

[Krikket]

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Mark Haney wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:38:46 -0500 (EST), Krikket <krikket at gothpoodle.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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.)
> >
> It wasn't more of a SWITCH than it was just trying to determine if it was
> a good 'average user' fit since Suse does allow repartitioning of drives
> on the fly.  Other than that, I didn't do much with it.

Ah.  Yeah, the repartitioning on the fly is a rather nice feature...

> > 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.
> >
> Nah GUI controls just get in the way. If I wanted more of those I'd stay
> with Windows. :)

I think SuSE is a step up from Windows, but...

> > 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.
> >
> Without warning? Not good.  But then I didn't do any hand editing in
> Suse.

Without warning.  I only ran into this a couple of times, when I edited
things like the hosts file.  But it wasn't that much of a problem for me.

On the flip side, a friend who was switching his RH servers over to SuSE
simply copied over a lot of files for the configuration of the servers.
(I *think* for Apache, Mailman, and a few other functions.)  And SuSE gave
him headaches overwriting his time-proven code with what *it* thought
should be there, based on it's windows "registry"like data, which is
stored in additional files...

> > 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
>
> Thanks for your honest opinion on that.  I think I'll stick with RH.

Anytime!  Glad to be of some help!

Krikket