Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S277612AbRJLJQQ>; Fri, 12 Oct 2001 05:16:16 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S277609AbRJLJQF>; Fri, 12 Oct 2001 05:16:05 -0400
Received: from oe39.law9.hotmail.com ([64.4.8.96]:31493 "EHLO hotmail.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S277608AbRJLJP7>;
	Fri, 12 Oct 2001 05:15:59 -0400
X-Originating-IP: [66.108.21.174]
From: "T. A." <tkhoadfdsaf@hotmail.com>
To: "J Sloan" <jjs@pobox.com>, "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20011011094548.jkp@riker.nailed.org> <3BC5E152.3D81631@bigfoot.com> <3BC5E3AF.588D0A55@lexus.com> <3BC5EB56.21B4EF88@bigfoot.com> <3BC5FA12.F8E5C91E@lexus.com> <OE64cxtniFKULPEhGD100007fff@hotmail.com> <3BC688A2.4C7640B7@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Which kernel (Linus or ac)?
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 05:14:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <OE394qrvAsp4XgWZGbR0000e29d@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2001 09:16:25.0562 (UTC) FILETIME=[91473BA0:01C152FE]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> That's odd, my Red Hat servers have been
> almost like appliances. Not perfect, but all
> the problems I've seen could be dealt with.

    Oh I could deal with all of the problems as well.  But after a good bit
of recompiling, patching, upgrading, backtracking the things done in the
"Redhat" way which many times don't match the man pages, as well as undoing
the "Redhat" way annoyances I just end up with a variation of my own hand
built distribution.  And once I have to replace the system experimental C
library and compiler it just get even more ridicules.

> I've seen worse problems in commercial
> unices, e.g. unixware - yuk - and hpux.

    I know.  Please don't remind me of UnixWare.  I buried that at my
clients' and companies' sites in the Linux 1.2.x days.

> x.0 release: New stuff, interesting, buggy
> x.1 release: A passable cleanup of the bugs in .0
> x.2 release: A smooth, polished, evolution of .1

    Well here's hoping that 7.2 is smooth and polished.  Especially since
Redhat has become the defacto standard and I'll probably be trying it out
again.

> (shrug) I had no idea it was alpha - it works
> well for me, and I'm a vi man.

    I never keep it around for long after I saw it crash a couple of times
on my first 7.0 or 7.1 box so I can't say much about its stability.  Besides
it was more the principal of the thing.  Why in the world use the alpha
version of a text editor when a perfectly good released version exists with
pretty much the same functionality.  One thing I did notice, if I remember
correctly.  Seamed that either the installed vim was crippled or had a bug
in reading my customized .vimrc file.  My custom options didn't get loaded
until I downloaded the latest 5.[89] source and recompiled myself a new
version.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/