[CentOS] is CentOS stable enough ?
geek.arnuld at gmail.com
Tue Jun 12 07:56:20 UTC 2007
> On 6/12/07, DamianS <dsteward at internode.on.net> wrote:
> ROFL. You admit to being a noob and then trying to tell us Fedora is a
> buggy distro?
> Sorry dude, but you're just plain wrong - Fedora does NOT suck.
i used Fedora 2,3,4, & 6. it is OT so i will keep it short:
FC-2 - year 2005, my 1st *NIX distro for a long time Windows user. it
ran fine, except i was too much buried into details of "can not find
shared library" "XMMS" etc BUT that is not Fedora-bug, that is my
FC-3: could not install it on my friends PC. installation broke in
the middle. i put FC-2 on the same PC and it ran fine
FC-4: i tried it on 4 PCs and it only installed on my PC and not on
other 3 PCs, same like FC-3 installation broke in the middle or just
after formatting the filesystem..
FC-6: i could install it but X does not display. i tried to change to
another terminal using C-M-F3 (or F4,5 6 etc). but i could not change
because Fedora FREEZES on using C-M-F(x). then i changed
"/etc/X11/xorg.conf" as per my hardware but problem was not solved.
then i tried FC-6 on my friend's PC and it installed only 2 CDs, it
simply refused to install other CDs even though i have 2 backup CDs
ready and those same CDs installed on my system.
on 2nd install, it installed 6 CDs but then it did not start any X,
like my problem.
on 3rd install, it installed 3 CDs only and refused others automatically.
i tried FC-6 on my 2nd friend's computer and it said something like
this: "not enough RAM, this system has not at least 256 MB of RAM and
hence will only do text-based install" and what the heck, that
computer had 256 MB DDR RAM.
> I do a yum update every day or two, and nothing has broken for the past
> few months at least.
i used Fedora because it had 6 CDs and all those compilers, GIMP and
other stuff built-in. i needed that as i and my friends, being poor,
did not have any internet connection. i got a new connection now from
my Father's salary :-(, i am still jobless. 1 friend refused and said
WindowsXP installs better because it does not refuse to install. other
has got a job as "C lecturer" :-).
since we never had any internet so we never used Yum or update our system.
> The difference between a stable system and an unstable one is quite
> often the person sitting in front of the keyboard and monitor.
> Please dont embarrass yourself in future by making public announcements
> like this until you have some reasonable experience under your belt.
i think that has do to do something with the "hidden secrets". on GUI
based GNU distros "/etc/network/interfaces/ifcfg-eth0" and "ifconfig"
are the "hidden-secrets". you try to make your system as easy as
possible and hide system configuration behind GUIs and that leads to
poor-managed system, my opinion only. i am Gentoo user now and find it
is quite good as it does not try to hide anything behind GUIs like
Sysconfig/WindowsXP and hence i do not have any major problems. some
minor bugs are there but that is software, nothing is perfect.
i am not talking of Desktops, i still use Window Manager for my work.
i am talking of system-configuration. when something breaks on Fedora
then Fedora *promotes* using sysconfig "point and click" and gives you
text-file as a choice. on Gentoo/Arch/CRUX you have text-files as only
choices and it is much simpler to understand the system and reason of
any breakage/problem with text-files.
i am the only one GNU user in my town. *no* one in my town used *NIX.
i am the only one. whatever my friends or other people say about
UNIX/Linux/GNU, GNU distro is the best thing that ever happened to
me. well, i am no longer a newbie, using Linux from last 1.5 years
and at least know what is "the UNIX effect" ->
More information about the CentOS