Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3349 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] SUSE 9.3: buggy as hell
  • From: Ben Rosenberg <red.kryptonite@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 18:07:24 -0700
  • Message-id: <e8fb479305050618073c12c48b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 5/6/05, Preston Crawford <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:39 +0300, Janne Karhunen wrote:
> > Let me first say that i'm a Linux professional, i make my living
> > off it and have been using it since -96. So far i've been a happy
> > camper with SUSE (for 6 years now), but now i honestly have to say
> > that i'm very, very, VERY disappointed with the quality of the
> > latest release. Really sad :(
> If you can, go back to 9.2. I think there are far fewer problem with
> 9.2. At least from what I've seen on this list.
> I did some soul-searching this week (publicly and privately) about
> whether to stick with SuSE. I downloaded and seriously considered
> Centos, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.
> In the end, however, I decided that with Centos or Fedora or virtually
> any other distro you either have to do beta testing for someone who may
> some day may pull the rug out from underneath you or you are stuck with
> a distro that may or may not be supported next week because the
> community isn't strong.
> SuSE has neither problem. I think Novell/SuSE is here to stay and the
> community is strong, if at times challenging. And even if the releases
> head more down the Fedora path, I guess I'd rather do beta testing for
> Novell than for Red Hat, if that's what it comes down to. As long as
> they continue to distribute SuSE Pro close to how they do today.
> So I would advise you to go back to 9.2. It's basically stable unless
> there's something in 9.3 that you need. Wait for 9.4/10 and hope they do
> a better job next time. That's what I'm doing.

Well, I've found that 9.3 is much better then 9.2. With 9.2 we had
issue where it had a strange bug where it would take 15-25 minutes to
reboot because EVERYTIME it booted the system it wanted to run
reiserfsck against the 1.8T data partition.. didn't matter what
settings were changed. I don't know where the final bug was.. but I
loaded 9.3 on one of these same machines yesterday and it took 3
minutes 18 seconds to reboot. A marked improvement. The machines are
4x3.2Ghz machines w/ 12 SATA drives in them that are connected to a 12
port 3Ware sata card. They aren't small boxes.

I don't know why some would have issue and some do not. I'm just
thankful that 9.3 fixed that bug.. because some of the PHB's were
talking Gentoo. I think I'd quit prior to that. :)


"There is no need to teach that stars can fall out of the sky
and land on a flat Earth in order to defend religious faith."

< Previous Next >