At 09:09 PM 03/22/2000 +0100, Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 08:25 -0500, Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
> >
> > I agree. I have to say though, since I use mandrake in a production
> > environment, I am not too crazy about upgrading from 6.1 at this point.
>
>Who told you to upgrade? Nobody. I know somebody running RH 5.2
>with some updated packages and is perfectly happy. The "lust" of
>upgrading and exploring a new distribution with some new
>gimmicks is always there, I know. But this is for techies,
>gamblers and people who just want to have fun with their Linux
>box. And of course people who need just this one new feature for
>their hardware or their purposes.
No one told me to upgrade, of course. This is a false dichotomy. You can
either live with something forever, without ever upgrading, or you can risk
getting totally screwed. Pardon me for wishing for an intermediate
state. civilme had an excellent point in his earlier email. This was one
of the things I liked about FreeBSD. You could play on the edge with the
development release, or you could use the stable release, which *did* have
bugfixes and enhancements periodically, but almost never got broken as a
result of this. Unfortunately, for reasons not worth going in to, I think
BSD is probably dead in the long term.
>So, as Mandrake is known for living on the bleeding edge, nobody
>should upgrade a "working/production environment" if his
>installed system is fulfilling his needs.
And so in your world, production linux boxes never get
upgraded? Especially with bugfixes, etc? I really would like linux to be
a commercial success, but this attitude won't get it there.
>He should test the new on a spare pc and may gradually include
>the new stuff in his working machines after testing.
>
>This way he doesn't pull on his (and others') nerves and all
>will come out well eventually.
>
>But I'm repeating well-known principles of life again.
Whether Sean had old (now apparently unsupported HW) is moot to the points
I was attempting to make earlier.
