Try this again: is Linux Linpus any good?
in [Setup]
|
From: Aragorn on 2 Jun 2010 02:39 On Tuesday 01 June 2010 17:29 in comp.os.linux.misc, somebody identifying as Stroller111 wrote... > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:46:16 -0700, RayLopez99 wrote: > >> Update: Linux anti-Windows trolls please keep out. Aragon this >> means you, Chrisv, SinisterMidget, etc. The name is Aragorn, with an "r", and _I_ am not the troll here, Ray Lopez. >> I want to followup and ask whether Acer supports Linux Linpus, [... I have explicitly mentioned this in my reply to you on comp.os.linux.setup, even though you did not actually ask that question, and when I had given you that reply, you didn't care to read it and claimed that nobody had replied to your questions. But just for the record, I'll humor you and re-iterate: Yes, if Acer supplies that machine *with* Linpus Linux installed *from* the factory, then they *are* guaranteeing that it will work with this particular operating system, and then - as any computer brand does - will even provide for a limited customer support that *includes* the use of this particular version of Linpus Linux on this particular machine. >> ...] and whether, since the Acer PC does not have a CD/DVD (unless >> you get an extension USB type, which I might get), it's safe to say >> Linpus will last say 5 years without having to do a clean reinstall. Distribution lifecycles - by which I mean: the time that the distribution vendor supports the distribution release with additional updates and bugfixes - are listed on the distribution's website. You can see for yourself, if you know how to use a web browser and a search engine. In addition to that, since one of the other posters mentioned that Linpus is based on Fedora, you can glean extra information from the Fedora website with regard to lifecycles. That said, no GNU/Linux distribution - and this also applies to any other operating systems - will be supported with new updates and bugfixes for five years, because once those five years have expired, several newer distributions will already have come out in the meantime. Some distributions such as Gentoo or PCLinuxOS use the "rolling release upgrade" mechanism, where the distribution is automatically upgraded to the next release by simply keeping the system updated. As such, simply keeping the distribution up to date will automatically result in the distribution becoming identical to any new major release. Most distributions however do not do this, so that when a new release comes out, you really do have to install it again. This is why it is recommended to keep "/home" on a separate filesystem, so that this filesystem need not be formatted when installing a new distribution and your data remains safe. Whether "/home" *will* be on a separate partition or not on this Acer machine is something I cannot tell you because I don't own the machine, and it's the hardware vendor who installs the operating system and who picks what goes where in terms of filesystems. I do however presume that the folks at Acer are clever enough to realize the importance of having "/home" separated from the root filesystem. >> [...] This is an ideal user--if ever there was one--for Linux, but >> unless Linux needs zero hand holding and installation help, I'm not >> going to get it. Personally as a power user I cannot see myself >> using anything but a first class OS like Windows. I have told you - i.e. Ray Lopez - before that you should lay of with the very deliberate flamebaiting if you really want serious technical advice, and in one of your earlier threads you actually bragged about how hard you try to insult us and get on our nerves. That said, the only thing that's really first class about Windows is the CDs or DVDs it comes on, because they make excellent skeet shooting targets. >> Seriously, Linpus Linux--is it any good? Serious replies only, >> though I am copying COLA. There is nothing serious about you or your question, Ray Lopez, so lay off. > Linpus is an Asian targeted distro, > > http://linuxbsdos.com/2008/02/20/linpus-linux/ > > There's yer link, Ray Low-pest I remember from my time in comp.os.linux.advocacy that many of these Wintrolls will deliberately pick a distribution of which they know in advance that it could possibly give them some problems, so that they can then come to Usenet and whine about those. -- *Aragorn* (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
From: despen on 2 Jun 2010 10:00 Stefan Patric <not(a)this.address.com> writes: > I'm > tiring of Fedora's short life cycle even though since FC6 I've only > upgraded every third release. I want to install an OS once and have it > live on the system for 5 to 7 years--the average time between my system > builds--with updates, of course. Since FC 8, I've upgraded to 9, 10, 11, 12 simply using yum to apply release updates. It's gotten steadily easier. 11 and 12 applied with no issues at all.
From: Stefan Patric on 2 Jun 2010 15:04 On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 10:00:19 -0400, despen wrote: > Stefan Patric <not(a)this.address.com> writes: > >> I'm >> tiring of Fedora's short life cycle even though since FC6 I've only >> upgraded every third release. I want to install an OS once and have it >> live on the system for 5 to 7 years--the average time between my system >> builds--with updates, of course. > > Since FC 8, I've upgraded to 9, 10, 11, 12 simply using yum to apply > release updates. It's gotten steadily easier. 11 and 12 applied with > no issues at all. You missed the point. I don't care how "easy" it is. I tire of doing it. Even every 15 months or so, that is, every third release. And if you didn't have problems after every release upgrade, you're one of the lucky ones. Plus, upgrading destroys the old system. For safety, I only do clean installs on separate partitions, keeping the last release as a bootable back up just in case. I would prefer if Fedora went to "rolling upgrades" where as you update at some point the current release becomes the next. Nothing special need be done. There has been discussion of this on the Fedora forums, but so far, it's only been said by the developers that it is "being considered" which means it probably won't be implemented. Stef
From: General Schvantzkoph on 2 Jun 2010 15:59 On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 19:04:28 +0000, Stefan Patric wrote: > On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 10:00:19 -0400, despen wrote: > >> Stefan Patric <not(a)this.address.com> writes: >> >>> I'm >>> tiring of Fedora's short life cycle even though since FC6 I've only >>> upgraded every third release. I want to install an OS once and have >>> it live on the system for 5 to 7 years--the average time between my >>> system builds--with updates, of course. >> >> Since FC 8, I've upgraded to 9, 10, 11, 12 simply using yum to apply >> release updates. It's gotten steadily easier. 11 and 12 applied with >> no issues at all. > > You missed the point. I don't care how "easy" it is. I tire of doing > it. Even every 15 months or so, that is, every third release. > > And if you didn't have problems after every release upgrade, you're one > of the lucky ones. > > Plus, upgrading destroys the old system. For safety, I only do clean > installs on separate partitions, keeping the last release as a bootable > back up just in case. > > I would prefer if Fedora went to "rolling upgrades" where as you update > at some point the current release becomes the next. Nothing special > need be done. There has been discussion of this on the Fedora forums, > but so far, it's only been said by the developers that it is "being > considered" which means it probably won't be implemented. > > Stef A rolling update would be fine assuming that you could go backwards and forwards on individual components. That's a very hard problem because there are so many inter-dependencies. Over the years I've stuck with a particular Fedora release longer than I would have liked because there was some important application that was broken in newer releases. The last thing you want to happen is to lose some critical program because an update replaced it with a newer broken version. The current release system gives you check points that you can always return to.
From: despen on 2 Jun 2010 17:24 Stefan Patric <not(a)this.address.com> writes: > On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 10:00:19 -0400, despen wrote: > >> Stefan Patric <not(a)this.address.com> writes: >> >>> I'm >>> tiring of Fedora's short life cycle even though since FC6 I've only >>> upgraded every third release. I want to install an OS once and have it >>> live on the system for 5 to 7 years--the average time between my system >>> builds--with updates, of course. >> >> Since FC 8, I've upgraded to 9, 10, 11, 12 simply using yum to apply >> release updates. It's gotten steadily easier. 11 and 12 applied with >> no issues at all. > > You missed the point. I don't care how "easy" it is. I tire of doing > it. Even every 15 months or so, that is, every third release. I think you missed the point. Going to a new release is no different than applying updates. "preupgrade" changes the repositories, then yum update finishes the job. It takes longer, but it's the same process. Start it in the evening, wake up in the AM and you're on a new release. > And if you didn't have problems after every release upgrade, you're one > of the lucky ones. As I remember, the first 2 gave me some package conflicts, easily resolved. The last 2 were issue free. I don't think that was an accident. When the "preupgrade" tool appeared I realized this has been tested. > Plus, upgrading destroys the old system. For safety, I only do clean > installs on separate partitions, keeping the last release as a bootable > back up just in case. You are missing the point. upgrading is using the same process as updating. It does not "destroy" the system. > I would prefer if Fedora went to "rolling upgrades" where as you update > at some point the current release becomes the next. Nothing special need > be done. There has been discussion of this on the Fedora forums, but so > far, it's only been said by the developers that it is "being considered" > which means it probably won't be implemented. Disagree. It's there now, and will only get better.
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: NAS server setup questions Next: Try this again: is Linux Linpus any good? |