[K12OSN] *sigh* FC2 issues

Shahms King shahms at shahms.com
Wed Aug 11 22:36:01 UTC 2004


On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 12:25 -0800, Andrew wrote:
> 
> I know redhat helped a lot with the early stages. But it seems that the 
> fedora model just isn't right for k12ltsp. At this rate FC3 will be out 
> by the time we have a reliable fc2.Wouldn't it make more sense to drop 
> fedora? I did. Debian comes to mind, but for those of us living in 
> netware systems maybe suse would be a good candidate? I don't mean to be 
> a killjoy, but I haven't been comfortable with any of the 4.X k12ltsps, 
> and I get the sense that the prob might be fedora itself.

If you want to go with the Debian model, you're more than welcome to
stick with K12LTSP 2.x for the next few years.  *ducks*

It also depends on what you mean by "reliable" FC2.  We've had much
fewer problems with the FC2 servers we have than the FC1 (and some of
the RH9 machines).  Not to be rude, but your post seems to be a lot of
unfounded assertions about the unsuitability of Fedora for K12LTSP.  If
you have some specific concerns that you'd like addressed, that's one
thing, but (as Eric pointed out) this has been discussed to death in the
past and things are not likely to change.  I would also maintain that
there are few, if any, legitimate technical reasons for such a change.

I know Eric had done some work on porting K12LTSP to WhiteBox/RHEL a
while ago, but I'm not sure how far that got.

-- 
Shahms E. King <shahms at shahms.com>
Multnomah ESD

Public Key:
http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/~sking/shahms.asc
Fingerprint:
1612 054B CE92 8770 F1EA  AB1B FEAB 3636 45B2 D75B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/k12osn/attachments/20040811/6501424d/attachment.sig>


More information about the K12OSN mailing list