Re: [SLE] SUSE 9.3: buggy as hell

From: Ben Rosenberg (red.kryptonite_at_gmail.com)
Date: 05/07/05

  • Next message: Anders Johansson: "Re: [SLE] SUSE 9.3: buggy as hell" 
    Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 18:07:24 -0700
To: suse-linux-e@suse.com

    On 5/6/05, Preston Crawford <me@prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
    > On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:39 +0300, Janne Karhunen wrote:
    > > Let me first say that i'm a Linux professional, i make my living
    > > off it and have been using it since -96. So far i've been a happy
    > > camper with SUSE (for 6 years now), but now i honestly have to say
    > > that i'm very, very, VERY disappointed with the quality of the
    > > latest release. Really sad :(
    >
    > If you can, go back to 9.2. I think there are far fewer problem with
    > 9.2. At least from what I've seen on this list.
    >
    > I did some soul-searching this week (publicly and privately) about
    > whether to stick with SuSE. I downloaded and seriously considered
    > Centos, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.
    >
    > In the end, however, I decided that with Centos or Fedora or virtually
    > any other distro you either have to do beta testing for someone who may
    > some day may pull the rug out from underneath you or you are stuck with
    > a distro that may or may not be supported next week because the
    > community isn't strong.
    >
    > SuSE has neither problem. I think Novell/SuSE is here to stay and the
    > community is strong, if at times challenging. And even if the releases
    > head more down the Fedora path, I guess I'd rather do beta testing for
    > Novell than for Red Hat, if that's what it comes down to. As long as
    > they continue to distribute SuSE Pro close to how they do today.
    >
    > So I would advise you to go back to 9.2. It's basically stable unless
    > there's something in 9.3 that you need. Wait for 9.4/10 and hope they do
    > a better job next time. That's what I'm doing.
     
    Well, I've found that 9.3 is much better then 9.2. With 9.2 we had
    issue where it had a strange bug where it would take 15-25 minutes to
    reboot because EVERYTIME it booted the system it wanted to run
    reiserfsck against the 1.8T data partition.. didn't matter what
    settings were changed. I don't know where the final bug was.. but I
    loaded 9.3 on one of these same machines yesterday and it took 3
    minutes 18 seconds to reboot. A marked improvement. The machines are
    4x3.2Ghz machines w/ 12 SATA drives in them that are connected to a 12
    port 3Ware sata card. They aren't small boxes.

    I don't know why some would have issue and some do not. I'm just
    thankful that 9.3 fixed that bug.. because some of the PHB's were
    talking Gentoo. I think I'd quit prior to that. :)

    -Ben 

    -- 
"There is no need to teach that stars can fall out of the sky
and land on a flat Earth in order to defend religious faith."
-- 
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
  • Next message: Anders Johansson: "Re: [SLE] SUSE 9.3: buggy as hell"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Anaconda: i/o error during read on /dev/hda
      ... I already tried to upgrade from SuSE 8.0 to SuSE 9.2. ... I wanted to switch to Fedora, because I recently worked with Fedora Core 3 ... > therefore cannot read the partition data. ... I have a SuSE Linux ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: FC2 doubtful quality?
      ... have to argue in context. ... > recall submitting a bug report on that file as far back as april of 2003: ... > suddenly stopped working in FC2. ... understand before you choose Fedora for your system. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: 10.0 not configuring ethernet cards
      ... The largeness of SUSE prohibits it from putting ALL on CD's (or on ... the one submitting a bug report. ... One that was the fix was finally added to the release. ... >> useless install CDs. ...
      (alt.os.linux.suse)
    • Re: ps2 mouse pointer wanders away
      ... I thought I'd ssh the whole file over to this box, to prove it, and discovered in the process that, while the interface was set up properly by the installer, the hosts file was set up to tell the fedora 9 box that it was the external interface of my dsl router. ... That boggled my mind enough that I forgot to take a copy of what I found in /etc/hosts, so I'm going to have a hard time filing a decent bug report on it. ... I expect that we'll end up proving that the whole idea of access control lists is a specification level bug, but only time will tell, and I really can't think of any other way of proving it is, other than to subject a mixed technical user group like this to the spec. ... I found an example of the mouse definition section on the web, but the problem now is getting the box back on the web first. ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: fedora-list Digest, Vol 60, Issue 181
      ... Problem with keyboard layout in kvm virtual machine ... Gnome scanner utility crashes, no Bugzilla component ... Damaged xterm in Fedora 10 ... This bug is 4½ years old... ...
      (Fedora)
    Loading