[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora] Re: FC1 stable, FC2 ... you wish.



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 08 June 2004 16:50, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:27:51 +0100, Andy Green <fedora 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
> bugzilla.

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:

http://lists.suse.com/archive/suse-linux-e/2004-Jun/0022.html

''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
current state''

(Off to beat that over some SuSE users' heads)

- -Andy

- -- 
Automatic actions for USB cameras, cardreaders, memory sticks, MP3 players
http://warmcat.com/usbautocam
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAxecAjKeDCxMJCTIRAuwOAJ4/rzElvQ6GvejUW4hAjHAYOntrngCgiWd0
lpW784LoEUBaaAbq/eFtmLg=
=rR0N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]