Thank you Aaron. That's what I was looking for - some reassurance as to what "more stable" was. It sounds like gentoo-sources is pretty stable and reliable.
As for asking twice that's my error - I'm just wrapping up the transisiton from Caldera WS 3.1 to Gentoo. KDE on the WS 3.1 box decided to die - again so I'm moving everything over. Part of that is the move to a new mail program and I thought I'd entered the address wrong and that it didn't go through especially when I didn't see the post appear after a long time. So I resent. > > From: Aaron Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2003/12/31 Wed AM 05:29:47 EST > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo-sources vs GS-sources > > Brett I. Holcomb wrote: > > The Gentoo docs say gs-sources are more stable and reliable then > > gentoo-sources but gentoo-sources have better > First of all, why ask the same > > question twice within 2 hrs of each other? > > I have not used gs-sources, only because I haven't needed to. > gentoo-sources is plenty stable and is most likely a bit faster as well. > I use gentoo-sources on both my desktop system and my mail server > (which has been up for 2 months.. it's only been booted up once, right > after the install ;) not bad for a really old P233 and 2 really old > 7giggers.. oh yeah and the really old 72-pin memory that I used to have > on my keychain) > > before I converted my mail server over to gentoo, it was running RH9 > which I had to reboot every 7 days or so because it would start to slow > down and get real sluggish. > > Every day I thank the god of computers that gentoo is here. > > Aaron > -- > /usr/bin/fortune says: > After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn. > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
