ATI video comes out of the closet

[Les Mikesell]

Frank Cox wrote:

>> Those are great for server apps that were feature complete ages ago but 
>> not so great for desktops apps receiving a lot of current attention. By 
>> next year the Firefox, OpenOffice, Evolution, etc. versions they include 
>> will be way, way out of date instead of just slightly outdated like they 
>> are now. Does firefox 1.5 sound current to anyone here? Would you want 
>> to be stuck with it until the next Centos release?
> 
> You are asking for something that is logically inconsistent.
> 
> 1. You want absolutely stable software.

I want a stable kernel and device drivers. The unix-like system call 
interface doesn't need to change every week.

> 2. You want the latest-and-greatest software.

I want current applications.  These are very different things. A bug in 
user space doesn't kill the machine.

> Though you try to sound like you are an "old hand" with computers and system
> administration, this demand makes it appear that you don't have the experience
> that you are claiming to have.
> 
> By definition, the latest-and-greatest software is not going to be rock-solid
> stable.  That's why it's called "cutting edge" -- you can sometimes get cut
> when you use it.

That's why I want a split between kernel and apps.

> You must make a choice here.

Only because of the bundling choices made for fedora and RHEL.  It 
doesn't have to be bundled that way.

> You have failed to make that choice, and want both.  Sorry.  It just doesn't
> work that way.  "I demand a dog, but it has to look exactly like a cat."
> 
> No.  You can't have it.

I can't have it until someone bundles the set I want, or teaches a 
package manager to install more than one version of an application on a 
machine at a time.  But apparently it hasn't occurred to anyone else 
that a distribution that contained firefox 2.x and didn't crash after 
updates would be desirable.  So I have to keep repeating it.

> I realize that you are probably disappointed by this, but it's simply the
> nature of the way that software development works in real life.

No, the fedora scheme is pretty unique.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com