> I have found that testing is the worst of both worlds (i.e. of stable & > unstable). It does not have the latest things, and it's not very > stable.
Interesting - I run several Debian boxes in a large-ish corporate environment and most of them have ended up being 'stable with a few critical packages from testing'. All are rock solid, uptime in the hundreds of days despite being fairly busy systems. That would be also my answer to the Red Hat survey. Uh - ran Deb before, gonna keep running it now. If we needed something big that was certified on Red Hat, we'd probably buy Enterprise. To the poster who said it was hard to install, my general strategy now is to install a bare minimum Woody with a 2.4 kernel, and then skip the whole tasksel business completely and install packages (and the useful meta-packages) as required. This seems to work pretty well and be painless, though it does rely on a fast net connection. To the poster who said he'd given up Debian because of dselect being horrible, I dunno, I've never used it. apt-get with occasional dips into dpkg are all I've needed. Possibly give it another try? Cheers, Julian. -- Julian Melville http://tiddly-pom.com/ -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
