> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Smelser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 8:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] quote from distrowatch weekly > > > > > Not much different than Debian, RH, etc. > > Actually no, rh keeps you at certain versions. We they moved to gcc3, I > didn't > have to upgrade to it, 5.2 sill had the same set of software.. >
I'm with you on that. The all-inclusive nature of portage's dependencies drives me nuts sometimes. And the all-inclusive nature of ebuilds sometimes drives me nuts (I'd like a good way to exclude ALL multimedia builds from, say, gnome just as an example). > Debian is not classified for servers.. AT ALL. So I don't know where your > getting that. What company you know thinks debian when he wants to install > linux on a server. > Not sure what makes you say that. I don't know many people who use Linux in general for production servers. Those that do that I'm aware of use RedHat. But it has nothing to do with "classified for servers" at all. It has to do with the fact that RedHat provides support for their OS. To any organization that would need a server, that's typically important. As for Debian on servers, it probably makes a lot more sense than most other distros for the exact reason why I hate running it on my desktop -- they strive for stability which means they are typically a couple/few revs back since they only use known stable/secure versions at any given time (secure being a moving target). Ric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
