[lug] Redhat 7.0
nate at natetech.com
Sun Oct 22 01:49:52 MDT 2000
It just dawned on me... I'm sure there *was*, but did anyone here have any
experience with RedHat 1.x, 2.x, 3.x, or 4.x?
I started at 5.1, or somewhere thereabouts, after watching a friend fight
his way through some nasty SlackWare stuff back then...
But *were* there those version numbers before 5?
I'll gladly defend Debian's numbering system which seems to not need to be
hit over the head with the cluebat -- it seems to more truly reflect the
state of maturity of the Linux OS in general, with 2.2 being the latest
The use of a codename also helps keep keep folks from focusing in on version
numbers so much...
RedHat = Guinness -- They were drinking too much of it the night they took
the GCC snapshot and decided "it's good enough, ship it!".
Debian (stable) = Potato -- Named after a rolly-polly cartoon character with
lots of spare parts you have to put together yourself to make him
interesting. Otherwise he's kinda dull.
They both fit their respective distros!! :)
> From: llornkcor <llornkcor at llornkcor.com>
> Organization: llornkcor rocknroll
> Reply-To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 05:50:58 -0600
> To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> Subject: Re: [lug] Redhat 7.0
>> Besides, KRUD has them beat as far as big numbers. This month's
>> release is over 20 million: 20001002 ;-)
> This is how I have been versioning my code. Makes for a cool
> looking number, people can readily see a new version, and the date
> released, it makes more sense to me, and takes the guessing out of
> arbitrarily setting a version number.
>> People keep saying things like "I won't touch the x.0 release.
>> I'll wait until at least x.2"
> Well, it's true that most of RedHat's x.0 releases suck. and that
> they usually fix things in x.1, and x.2. I am just going by what I
> read in newsgroups, and such. In fact, the dist I last installed
> was RH 6.0, but then I promptly upgraded packages like glibc,
> etc,enough to make it not really 6.0. Even if I installed RedHat
> 7.0, I would go out and find the latest releases from the
> different projects. No matter WHEN RH releases its CD's, there are
> always newer 'packages' out there. Some of which has had security
> patches applied. I don't know about the inetd.conf thing. I think
> I'd rather have one file, instead of a new directory and several
> files. Anyone care to explain the advatages of the RH's new inetd
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
More information about the LUG