OS Future now that Fedora Legacy defunct

[Donald Tripp]

I agree with Les on that opinion. I have several machines running  
redhat 9. There isn't anything earth shattering that I want to do  
with those machines, and the bug fixes that exist tighten the machine  
pretty tight. I've never had any problems with those machines, and  
they've been running  for years without even a reboot.


- Donald Tripp
  dtripp at hawaii.edu
----------------------------------------------
HPC Systems Administrator
High Performance Computing Center
University of Hawai'i at Hilo
200 W. Kawili Street
Hilo,   Hawaii   96720
http://www.hpc.uhh.hawaii.edu


On Dec 22, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:

> On Fri, 2006-12-22 at 16:52 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>> Well, you could always use the old kernel if the new one doesn't  
>> work.
>> (Quite a lot of distribution kernels don't work for me anyway,
>> on one or other of my machines.)
>>
>> I think the OP asked quite a pertinent question,
>> and I don't think anyone has given a very cogent answer.
>
> A more succinct question: why should you _ever_ replace a currently
> working kernel on existing hardware with anything that is not
> perfectly backwards compatible (i.e. more than bugfixes)?
>
> I'd like to stay current with firefox, evolution, and a couple of  
> other
> things but don't understand the need to reinstall a kernel and new
> mostly
> untested device drivers just to get them.  In the gazillion kernel  
> revs
> that fedora has rolled out, I can't recall seeing one that made a
> noticeable
> improvement in anything that previously worked correctly and have had
> fairly bad luck with them breaking things that had worked before.
>
> When I get new hardware I don't mind fiddling with an up to date  
> kernel
> with current drivers.  I just don't see the point in having to do that
> every few months to keep a browser, word processor and email program
> up to date on an existing system.  The point of emulating the stable
> unix API in the first place should be to isolate the kernel and  
> standard
> libraries from application developement, so why can't we have
> distributions
> that keep them separate?   Currently the distributions that try to  
> keep
> the kernel stable don't keep the applications up to day and the ones
> that
> update everything break the kernel and drivers all the time.
>
> -- 
>   Les Mikesell
>    lesmikesell at gmail.com
>
>
> -- 
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20061222/db46df92/attachment-0001.htm>