Scyld and Red Hat 7

[stig]

As long as the system includes the main libs, a kernel and the popular
package managers (well RPM)  does it really matter what distribution it is
based on?

Would there be this discussion if they 'based' it on their own compilation
of binaries instead of those of RedHats.


David


On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Gerry Creager wrote:

> Ken wrote:
> > 
> > Martin Siegert wrote:
> > 
> > > 2. with respect to hardware support: most of that comes with the kernel,
> > >    particularly everything that is loaded as modules (e.g., and NIC drivers).
> > >    Hence, upgrading to a 2.4 kernel probably gets you better hardware
> > >    support than upgrading to RH 7.0.
> > >
> > 
> > I can agree with you in that since I upgraded to RH7 I've decided to use
> > Mandrake instead. ;-)
> > The original questions was about baseing the next release of Scyld in
> > RH7.  It is hard to upgrade a distro that doesn't load in the first
> > place.  If upgrading the kernel is enough, then that's fine.  I can
> > think of plenty of reasons to keep the distro as simple and functional
> > as possible.
> 
> While my experiences with Mandrake have generally been horror stories,
> my experiences with RH7 have been disasters of truly epic proportion. 
> I've just about got RH7 tamed... as long as I don't mount my CDROM and
> use tcp/ip at the same time... and NO! I'm not kidding.
> 
> I've stuck to RH6.2 for production.  
> -- 
> Gerry Creager                        |      Never ascribe to Malice that
> AATLT			             |      which can adequately be
> Texas A&M University                 |      explained by Stupidity.
> 979.458.4020  (Phone)                |      -- Lazarus Long
> 979.847.8578  (Fax)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
>