Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!uunet!in2.uu.net!155.212.1.8!paperboy.ids.net!dseyst From: dseyst@ids.net (Dave Seyster) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD Date: 2 Feb 1997 15:29:03 GMT Organization: IDS World Network Internet Access Service, (401) 885-4243 Lines: 18 Message-ID: <slrn5f9csh.c8n.dseyst@dseyst.ids.net> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5cdqos$e6k@camel1.mindspring.com> <Pine.SOL.3.91.970201040446.16129A-100000@ux8.cso.uiuc.edu> <32F3810D.237C228A@freebsd.org> <5d21gt$12d@nic.wi.leidenuniv.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn045a.nwp-ri.ids.net X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.2.1 BETA UNIX) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:155724 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2193 On 2 Feb 1997 12:32:28 GMT, J.H.M.Dassen <jdassen@wi.leidenuniv.nl> wrote: >>How about Slackware? > >Slackware is dying. It is being killed by its basic premise of a >distribution maintained by one person. With each new release of >Slackware, new bugs are introduced that at best are fixed half a year >later, and hordes of users turn to up-to-date, well-organized >distributions in which bugs get fixed. Slackware is about as relevant to >Linux nowadays than 386BSD is for FreeBSD: it is a thing of the past. You forgot to mention that this is just your opinion and based on anecdotal evidence at best. Slackware does have a few problems but surely no more than RedHat. In MY experience, Slackware is far easier to set up and maintain. I have had nothing but problems with two different RedHat distributions. Some people may want or need the "handholding" provided with RedHat, not me. I have yet to run into a bug in Slackware that I couldn't fix.