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

Re: are there any serious show-stoppers in phoebe-2?



On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 05:53:10AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
> 
>   historically, i've always been keen on installing any new
> red hat betas on my machine, since i don't normally push
> the envelope in terms of what i'm trying to do.
> 
>   a little browsing, a little fetchmail, some editing, that
> sort of thing.
> 
>   but i was scared off with phoebe-1, given what i saw the
> first couple of days after release with a spate of pretty
> serious problems, so i just let phoebe-1 pass and waited
> for the next version.
> 
>   same deal with phoebe-2 -- i'm still uncomfortable with
> the number of complaints regarding what seem to be still
> major bugs.
> 
>   comments from other testers?  i would have been happy to
> just wander over to bugzilla and peruse the phoebe-2 bug
> reports, except for the fact that red hat (with an attitude
> i find maddening to this day) *still* refuses to rename new
> beta releases.  argh.


You have probably already long ago made your move one way or the other,
Rob. But I just dropped back to Psyche myself after a few weeks with
Phoebe2. For me the breakers were rpm 4.1|2 which continues to be hosed to
some greater or lesser degree; and the fact that there is some major
breakage in the gcc 3.2 toolchain that corrupts some (but not all) perl
makefiles. Psyche has become quite stable since its original release so
I'm not missing much. Phoebe2 is bleeding edge and it is tough living out
there for long :))

-- 
Jack Bowling
mailto: jbinpg shaw ca





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