-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 01 Mar 2005 8:49 pm, Ajay Mulwani wrote: > Yes, but be sure RHEL 2.1's performance is just too bad on SATA > drives. FYI: RHEL 2.1 is not free. If you are looking for freewares > RH9.0 should be a good option.
What makes you say that RH 2.1 is bad on performance with SATA? I haven't found any such performance issues. And what is your definition of "free" ? rrs - -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf RESEARCHUT -- http://www.researchut.com Gnupg Key ID: 04F130BC "Stealing logic from one person is plagiarism, stealing from many is research". -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCJKYx4Rhi6gTxMLwRAqqUAJ0bgpinDuzDepASeH9GKwhKpAUy9gCbBDw7 a1KvGBO/qPxiW/llgXm6rao= =RH6y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
