Sorry, I have no way of testing the centos install on my geode,
because it is an embedded board without disk I/O ports.
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:46 PM, Will Langford <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh <email@example.com>
>> Will Langford wrote:
>>> If Sally can paint a house in 4 hours and John can paint a house in 6
>> Answer: 42 ?
> Heh. Actually 2.4.
>>> No, seriously. Given the .... 'target' of CentOS as a RHEL alternative,
>>> is it necessarily appropriate to attempt to support such hardware ? While I
>>> can understand some energy density benefits of running an LX800, I just
>>> personally don't see it as fitting with the nature of CentOS.
>> That is indeed a very good question. Let me answer that in a few hours
>> time when I am on a real computer, not over NX from my phone to the computer
> I actually look forward to the answer. While I see linux or netbsd (etc) as
> a good swiss army knife base for alot of hardware, I don't think targeted
> distro's should attempt to swiss army knife it -- ya then get excessive
> complexity or limited features due to a low lowest-common-denominator
>>> Note: I'm pretty much just a quiet outsider and just a user for the most
>>> part... so my opinion carries no weight.
>> No such thing, if you are using it - you automatically become a part of
>> the community and voices are good.
> This is the 'developers' list
. As such, I'd imagine it'd be more for
> people working on advancing the distro heh. My only experience with CentOS
> is remote dedicated servers -- I don't believe I've actually ever manually
> installed it. I've worked with 4.x and 5.0... have yet to experience 5.1.
> So far I've been very very happy with CentOS in general. My 4.x box got
> violated a couple times, even rooted heh
. The 5.0 installation seems to
> be doing much better. I've had some issues with getting up to date ant/java
> stuff for WowzaMediaServer/Red5, but all in all, I'd say I'm really happy
> with 5.0.
> Here at work, we still use RH9.0 on production servers that go into the
> field (not broke, dont fix it). If we ever need to do a major update due to
> hardware limitations or similar... and a new distro makes sense, it'll be
> CentOS (gotta love being the top of decision making hehehe)... it's been
> rock solid on my remote machines (other than the poor 4.x box heh).
> CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel mailing list