Wouldn't it make sense too run server systems on the SERVER version of SUSE? The price isn't exactly expensive, the Desktop version of RedHat costs about the same as a standard SUSE Server. I'd buy it but I don't run actual servers here, just FTP and Apache and SSH for me and sometimes friends.
There are probably good and bad arguments boths ways. The linux distros I have used have always been robust enough to fill the server role without a problem. The way I look at any distro is that: (1) you have the kernel, then (2) you load whatever packages you require to get the functionality you desire. The bottom line is "it's the kernel stupid" (not directed at you and no offense meant) So with regard to the thread, and the history of other distros that have suffered QA problems by rushing release # next out the door, the point to be made is -- don't short change the stability of the kernel in 9.2. Suse has done a great job with its kernels, recent growing pains aside. So I have no doubt Suse will do a good job with the 9.2 kernel, just don't forget about stability for those of us who rely on it. -- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. Rankin * Bertin, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 (936) 715-9333 www.rankin-bertin.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allen" <gorebofh@comcast.net> To: <suse-linux-e@suse.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 10:24 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] 9.2 and BAD kernel.
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 08:43:03PM -0500, David Rankin wrote:
I wouldn't!! STABILITY my friend - that IS what most of us want and MUST have!
Amen Fred. After being wholly dissapointed with Mandrake 8.0, 8.1, 8.2, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2 for that exact reason. I was thrilled with Suse 8.2 and 9.0. The jury is still out on 9.1 for reasons you describe. 9.2 needs to be bulletproof from a server standpoint. I look to move my production system to 9.2 after the list settles down regarding little glitches. Keep stability in mind! My Mandrake 7.2 box is getting very old.
-- David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E. Rankin * Bertin, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 (936) 715-9333 www.rankin-bertin.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Miller" <fmiller@lightlink.com> To: <suse-linux-e@suse.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 7:04 PM Subject: Re: [SLE] 9.2 and BAD kernel.
On Tuesday October 12 2004 6:58 pm, Philipp Thomas wrote:
Fred Miller <fmiller@lightlink.com> [Tue, 12 Oct 2004
18:27:10 -0400]:
Why is SUSE going to use the 2.6.8 kernel?! The reports on 2.6.8 AREN'T good!!
Have you forgotten that SUSE employs a number of kernel hackers? This isn't the vanilla 2.6.8!
Why not 2.6.7....it was stable?!
And have a vast number of people bashing SUSE because of an "ancient" kernel?
I wouldn't!! STABILITY my friend - that IS what most of us want and MUST have! I don't need grief, like we have now, for example getting XCDRoast to allow users to burn a CD, and getting a number of hardware to work properly. I'm not picking on SUSE, you should know that by now.
Fred
-- "Running Windows on a Pentium is like getting a Porsche but only being able to drive it in reverse with the handbrake on."
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com