Re: Migrating to appropriate linux distribution
From: Michael W. Cocke (cocke_at_catherders.com)
Date: 01/16/04
- Previous message: Michael W. Cocke: "Re: Time Server Application"
- In reply to: Keith Clark: "Re: Migrating to appropriate linux distribution"
- Next in thread: RodgerH: "Re: Migrating to appropriate linux distribution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:46:09 -0500
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:54:03 -0800, Keith Clark
<clarkphotography@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Bit Twister wrote:
>
>> On 14 Jan 2004 15:30:26 -0800, Mike Holloway wrote:
>> > I'm taking Red Hat's suggestion of replacing Red Hat Linux seriously,
>> > but their tables have convinced me that none of their products, or
>> > projects, are meant for someone with my needs. All I want is to run a
>> > non-Bill operating system for a home network. Their description of
>> > Fedora as "bleeding edge" sends me screaming from the room in fright.
>> > Their Enterprise is more expensive than Bill's XP, and does things I
>> > certainly don't need. Can anyone tell me what the current no brainer
>> > distribution is for the non-programming family man?
>>
>> Mandrake or Suse.
>
>I have Mandrake 9.2, thanks to last month's "Linux Format" magazine so I
>installed it and played around. Mandrake seems nice and I really liked the
>urpmi command. But their system update just drove me nuts. It seemed like if
>I did the logical thing and selected say, KDE updates that were available,
>then it would hose the system. Otherwise it's nice, but not as impressive as
>Suse.
>
>For a desktop user who just wants to get work done, and have very good
>plug-and-play wizards, Suse beats Mandrake hands down (try configuring a TV
>tuner card in Mandrake vs Suse and you'll see what I mean - in Suse it's
>easier than in Windows).
>
>--Keith
Unless they fixed it without telling anyone, there's a fairly severe
problem in SuSE 9. After doing a whole lot more research than I ever
wanted to, I discovered that SuSE shipped the module utilities set up
for the 2.6.x kernel series, with some type of automatic fall-back to
the correct module utilities if you're trying to work with the kernel
2.4.x series.
Unfortunately, the automatic fall-back is more like an automatic fall
down - it doesn't work.
The result is, if you install the -144 kernel update (via YOU), the
kernel module path that is used is the default -99. In other words,
you're using the modules that were built for the older (as shipped)
kernel. If you try to manually upgrade kernels to any 2.4.x series
kernel, you wind up with the same problem.. No matter what you do
(unless you go thru and undo their clever idea completely, which is
too much work to be worthwhile), you wind up using the as-shipped -99
kernel modules. A wonderfully stable configuration... NOT.
Luckily Mondo does a sanity check before it begins to backup, and that
tipped me off. I had a hell of a time tracking this backwards because
I assumed first that it was my error, then that there was a bug in
Mondo. Only after all other possibilities were exhausted did I
conclude that SuSE blew it. I'll wait for SuSE 9.1 before I try SuSE
again, thanks.
Mike-
Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive.
-----------------------------------------------------
Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have
installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If
email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded,
non-attachments.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
- Previous message: Michael W. Cocke: "Re: Time Server Application"
- In reply to: Keith Clark: "Re: Migrating to appropriate linux distribution"
- Next in thread: RodgerH: "Re: Migrating to appropriate linux distribution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
