[H-GEN] Linux kernel 2.2 and RedHat 6.0 Stability
Frank Brand
fbrand at uq.net.au
Wed Jun 9 01:59:15 EDT 1999
(Note reply-to: being general at humbug.org.au vs Frank Brand <fbrand at uq.net.au>)
Steve Elliott wrote:
> (Note reply-to: being general at humbug.org.au vs Steve Elliott <steve at virtuozo.com.au>)
>
> Frank Brand wrote:
> >
> >
> > Or a later version. I think for a newbie used to Win9X that Mandrake 6 (kernel 2.2.9) is a
> > better bet.... but it is early days for kernel 2.2.
> >
> > I found RH 5.2 very reliable (Or Mandrak 5.3 if you like).
> >
> > --
>
> Hey thanks Frank. What would you recommend to a linux newbie who is very
> used to Silicon Graphics Irix ?
After serious consideration...yes I think it would be MS DOS 2 *wink*.
Well, SGI is very graphically oriented so I would probably still go with Mandrake or RH (Mandrake is built onto a RH system. In fact there is now little difference between RH and Mandrake now that the people in the Technology Triangle have embraced Qt/KDE)
A full Red Hat installation is 1118 MB and a full Mandrake is 1145 or 1147 MB (IIRC).
If you are not so interested in GUI's and the graphical side, pretty well any distribution will do similar things. Most ppl here would probably support Debian, I find Red Hat easy to use. I believe SuSE is a very complete distribution (but I have not used it).
I have not used the latest Caldera distribution but it seems (reported to be) to be the best installation arrangement of all. I did use an earlier version and it was very similar to Red Hat.
I might go along with other earlier respondents and agree any Red Hat (and this goes 5 times more for M$) and also other X.0 distribution is likely to be a bit suspect.
Your choice really.
--
Frank Brand
E-mail: fbrand at uq.net.au
Home Page: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzfbrand
--
This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
Postings only from subscribed addresses of lists general or general-post.
More information about the General
mailing list