begin Ken Moffat's quote: | dep wrote | | >redhat is not fhs-compliant. if it were, i'd be using it. | | What do you use?
right now -- and by this i really *do* mean for the moment -- a severely hacked SuSE 7.2 on my production machine, and a collection of various other distros on other machines, though i intend to bring or try to bring a little more order to this disarray over the next few weeks, limiting my lab rat stuff to just my lab rat machine. the catalyst for this is my acquisition of two thinkpad 240s with max memory, extra batteries, and the whole range of accessories, off-lease and refurbed, for cheap. this brings the number of machines around here above the critical point where it's just two damn complicated to have a different distribution on every machine in the place. i'm therefore auditioning distributions, with performance an important issue -- unlike some, i see no virtue in software that requires a 1-gig machine with 256 megs of memory for adequate performance. anybody can produce such software. the trick is getting performance out of a system of far less resources, and that is an area on which few have concentrated. it will, therefore, come as no surprise that a leading contender is slackware. while i'm at it -- and if no one responds, i'll send this part out standalone -- i've been beating myself bloody over the last few months trying to get a linux machine to work with the ethernet data ports now commonly found in hotel rooms. i fear that these are set up largely for win2k's horrible and unsecure plug-and-play network stuff; in any case, i've spent hours and hours trying to get connections, to no avail. anybody here ever get one of these things to work in linux? -- dep http://www.linuxandmain.com -- outside the box, barely within the envelope, and no animated paperclip anywhere. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
