put win2k on there and get the machine patched up to the best of your knowledge/ability.
i never trusted the service packs, autoupdates, etc. in the past, but at one point it just got too cumbersome to stay up on their safety, effectiveness, etc. the only windows machine i use is an xp box at work, but i have to admit i'm lazy about the auto-update, so i just let it run nowadays. same goes for the similar feature built into os x as well...i just trust apple out of laziness, knowing my data is backed up decently well. my linux boxes on the other hand are slackware machines - no auto-updating there at all, so everything is hand patched to the best of my ability. i've muddled with slapt, but i don't really like it or trust it.
it seems apt users have to put a lot of trust in whoever maintains the package lists on their apt server(s) of choice. is this correct? i have limited debian use, but i've muddled with apt-rpm on a fedora box quite a bit and it seems pretty solid. how often does an apt-get update/upgrade break things? (and i suppose this depends on one's use of stable or testing).
Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Dave Margolis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
the answer is me. that os sucks ass. put win2k on there and upgrade it to whatever the most recent service pack is (4 i think); they'll be happy...
Hmm. http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Legacy_Microsoft/service-packs.html
_______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
_______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
