[Fedora] Re: FC1 stable, FC2 ... you wish.
fedora at warmcat.com
Tue Jun 8 16:19:07 UTC 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 16:50, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:27:51 +0100, Andy Green <fedora at warmcat.com> wrote:
> > and was depressed to find
> > that the latest SuSE is 2.6 and not exhibiting the kinds of problems we
> > see in FC2
> I would like to know how you know people using the latest suse are not
> seeing similar problems.
"SuSE users beat me over the head with it" is the best I can offer. And the
fact that SuSE users won't be seeing the problems with the FC2
install/installed kernel that came from the RH-specific kernel patches.
> Can you point be to a public bugzilla that Suse
> uses that catelogs reported problems that I can search. I'd love to make a
> comparison for myself, but I can't seem to find a public
Nope. They seem to have paid support, read-only knowledgebase and a ml.
Sort of like MSFT.
I glance at their ml archives and I see this:
''Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with
filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning
to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single
point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having
random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its
(Off to beat that over some SuSE users' heads)
Automatic actions for USB cameras, cardreaders, memory sticks, MP3 players
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the fedora-list