> 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 newbish-ness :-) 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" -> http://arnuld.blogspot.com/2007/02/sf-experience.html -- http://arnuld.blogspot.com/