[ale] suse distribution

[Linux Idiot]

Elijah Underwood wrote:
> 
> I made pretty much the switch you are talking about.
> 
> I was using RH 5.0 which I found horrendously buggy. I'm purchased RH
> 5.1 at the same time as I received a demo CD of SuSE (at the LinuxExpo).

Would you care to ellaborate on 'horrendously buggy?'  The install, the
kernel, what?  I've got 5.0 on two boxes, and although I had some small
glitches during install, I've found it to be very stable.

> 
> I've never gotten around to installing RH 5.1. I fell in love w/ SuSE.
> The Yast configuration is WONDERFUL. (okay, so it doesn' have "redneck"
> language support, but it's otherwise far superior to the RH installation
> --with the notable exception of the LILO configurator).

Would you care to ellaborate on 'redneck language support?'

> 
> I've also installed several "for RedHat" applications on my SuSE box
> (namely ApplixWare !) and they work fine. The only thing reason I'd try
> RH 5.1 (besides the reason that I paid for it) is to see how well
> GNOME works. SuSE comes with KDE, which I'm not too crazy about. From
> what I hear 5.1 is much more stable than RH 5.0 was.

Based on the stuff I've seen on the RedHat install list, 5.1 appears to
be causing more grief than 5.0.

> 
> I've been running stably for a week or so (rebooting for hardware
> failures, kernel recompiles and to :-( switch temporarily into Win95 ),
> which is a good record for me (I went through 3 serious hard-drives
> failures in two weeks last month.) I'm only using fvwm2, but I've
> spruced it up a bit with tkDesk and a couple of custom changes.

-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric at denali.atlnet.com

Get Windows CE and watch Windows crash in the palm of your hand...