What Distro to use

[der.hans]

Am 02. Nov, 2000 schwäzte Hawke so:

> when I went to RH7.0 something changed...  The system doesn't 
> perform quite as well (sure, there are some nice enhancements
> like better, more stable X windows managers), and I get loads more
> segfaults on compiling than before.
> 
> Basically, I am wondering what redhat software was thinking when they
> decided to increase their version number to 7. it should be more like
> 6.5!

Dist version number doesn't mean anything. It's marketing. To some extent
it's helpful to know if there were minor or major changes, which with
Linux dists it usally is an indication of the level of changes that've
taken place, but it really has no real meaning.

debian doesn't need dist versions at all. They could stay with stable and
unstable or bo, hamm, potato and woody and it wouldn't matter.

The probs you're seeing might well have to do with using a devel snapshot
of gcc and other technical changes, but has nothing to do with the dist
versioning.

Then again, other than pine, why do you need to recompile stuff? RH ain't
exactly slackware :).

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  der.hans@LuftHans.com   home.pages.de/~lufthans/   www.Opnix.com
#  I'm not anti-social, I'm pro-individual. - der.hans