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

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

Jack Bowling wrote:
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.

I have only one major bug left to complain about. I filed a bug report for it. Hopefully it will be resolved. (mc and gnome-terminal)

The other bugs are mild. I'll have to file bugs on these soon. (xsane not un-initializing the scanner on exit.)

Most of my interests are for multimedia. Having RealPlayer 9 working, through phoebe, has helped me become comfortable with the change to phoebe.
I do however, like being able to read docs and occasional presentations, that are forwarded to me.

Email is another thing that I like to use the system for. I'm more concerned with the applications to read mail. My favorite app is mozilla for email. The lack of the spellchecker, is the only thing that I miss, compared to Evolution.

Having a web server and file transfer method is also one of my interests. They work with phoebe, so I will stay up on the project.

The main thing that surprises me is that there are no new updates through phoebe and up2date. I anticipated having updates, with enhancements or fewer bugs available.

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 :))

After my last email regarding a response to apt being hosed with rpm and the newer kernel. I am assuming that phoebe is not ideal for running apt to retrieve programs.

I can do an experiment with the older kernel, newer rpm version now. I suspect that the newer kernel being enhanced with backports from 2.5 might be causing a great deal of the problems. Since this is a beta release, we should be trying 2.5 versions, to get up to 2.6. (I heard there was a freeze on new editions to the 2.5 cycle. Not sure if 2.6 is being worked on yet.)

I'm not a developer, but it sounds like a nightmare, with backports.

I guess trying perl developers for beginners is not a good ideas on phoebe.


Most people will listen to your unreasonable demands, if you'll consider
their unacceptable offer.

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