On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 06:16:09PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 04:09:16PM -0200, Leandro Guimar?es Faria Corcete Dutra > wrote: > > Em Ter, 2004-01-06 ?s 08:18, Michael B Allen escreveu: > > > Is 3.0r1 glibc 2.3. > > > > Don't remember. But I guess you will upgrade to GLibC 2.4 when you > > upgrade to testing in order to get Gnome 2. > > There's no such thing as glibc 2.4 yet. > > > > What surprises can a RH user expect? > > > > I guess the biggest hurdles would be the text-mode, no-detection > > installer (do a system inventory first) and the fact that stable is > > obsolete, so one is almost forced to upgrade to testing. > > I don't think this last is as true as people keep saying. Stable's quite > usable. > > Cheers, > > -- > Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > agreed. stable is entirely usable. the fact that there's a whole new world of usability on the way--when sarge goes stable--shouldn't be an excuse to believe that woody is obsolete. jeez, i'd take potato over rh any version any day of the week. support is the issue, and because debian is the way it is, there's never a lack of that.
i run woody on a very quirky sony jp issue laptop without a hitch. stable is as stable means. it works, and can be made to do whatever needs to be done. what's sarge got beyond a hipper version of x? i'm thinking forget rh, same way you forgot whatever you had before that. actually, i've yet to hear/read signs of significant gratitude from the new influx of rh refugees for the quality of support that has been extended to them on this list--not that it wouldn't happen, anyway. your commercial distro went cost productive, and then dumped you. c'mon, show a little appreciation that debian is here to catch your fall. with time, you'll realize that you couldn't have landed better, anywhere--woody included. ben -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
