Re: synchronising with Redhat

[Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com>]

jfm2@club-internet.fr wrote:

> >
> > On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> >
> > > I suppose the other issue is the bigger one, though -- do we expect Redhat
> > > to finish their release (6.0?) on time, and do we expect it to be different
> > > enough that we can't just tell them to plug in the new rpms?
> >
> > Aren't they going to jump to glibc 2.1 ?
> >
>
> I will inquire.  But I fear more probable is them going egcs 1.1 and
> that would mean problems with C++

"BlueSky" has been using egcs-1.1.1 for some time now.  Also, they have removed
all 2.0.x series kernels from the package, and are using 2.2.2 the last I could
check.

> > Is there any reason why we should sync with Redhat ? their major releases
> > are hardly known for quality control. Being on the bleeding edge is nice
> > , but seems somewhat contrary to our goals. Being a little bit behind the
> > bleeding edge is smart. I remember all of those dissatisfied RH5 customers
> > on the groups, many of whom became satisfied SuSE customers.
> >
>
> I expect a much better install and some nice features on the user
> friendliness area.  In addition they will be including Gnome.

Do you know more about the install improvements?

Regards,

Andreas Pour
pour@mieterra.com