[1263] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: [Kevin 'Bob' Fu: Re: Relocation of slackware distributions ]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Tue Feb 20 10:55:15 1996
To: Emil Sit <sit@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Adam Holt <holt@graphics.lcs.mit.edu>, linux-dev@MIT.EDU
From: hartmans@MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Date: 20 Feb 1996 10:54:46 -0500
In-Reply-To: Emil Sit's message of Mon, 19 Feb 1996 17:06:34 EST
>>>>> "Emil" == Emil Sit <sit@MIT.EDU> writes:
>> Hello Linux-Help whoever receiveth this,
Emil> I think linux-dev would have been a more appropriate
Emil> forum...
>> This is a call to urge that somebody at MIT host a copy of the
>> RedHat Linux distribution so we have a local copy. I
>> personally use a heavily patched Slackware 3.0 but will upgrade
>> to RedHat very soon.
Emil> I think that mirroring the distribution should be fairly
Emil> simple...
>> 1. RedHat patches and supports its distribution very well.
Emil> I'm not sure how well we would be able to support redhat
Emil> here. Sam Hartman has said that he found RedHat 2.0 and 2.1
Emil> (or was that 2.1 and 2.2) to be somewhat
Emil> unsatisfactory. Someone also commented to me at one point
Emil> that if the ftp install dies, it doesn't recover very
Emil> well. I've cc'ed Sam so he can issue a more interesting
Emil> report, if he wants :)
I tried installing 2.0 and 2.1 on several systems. Version
2.0 was quite usable if it supported your hardware, while version 2.1
just randomly died in the installer on the three systems I tried it
on.
Redhat isn't particularly forgiving of errors during the
install process; it does some of the customization only if the ftp
completely succceeds. Still, I'm not convinced trying Readhat here
would be a bad idea.
--Sam
