Linked by Ben Mazer on Wed 15th Oct 2003 20:58 UTC
A few months ago I was a Slackware Junkie. I loved it, and laughed at those who used 'more automatic' distributions (ok, I didn't actually laugh). Then Arch Linux 0.5 came out and I was very intrigued by it. I was getting tired of having to compile updated packages myself. 
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think all posters will agree that no matter which distro you use, there will be some problem encountered by somebody, somewhere. To suggest that Suse, Red Hat or Mandrake are silver bullets is laughable.
Whether one has GUI config tools up the wazoo or nothing but nano and a manpage - there will be pains encountered. If you're new to Linux and using a distro for the first time, you'll make wrong moves. And if you're an admin of many years with expertise in A, B and C you'll make mistakes when you're tasked with D.
Sounds like most of your candidates were simply not qualified at all - hope someone worked out in the end? Was that an argument for or against a distro though - sounds like a non sequitor?
I've been using arch for a few months now and have been quite comfortable with it. It's at 0.5, but runs fast and stable considering 1.0 remains a ways down the road. Unless the project goes to hell, I'll be hanging out a while. I'm a SOHO user and it's perfect for MY needs. What's more, I get to experience the speed of my machine from the get-go.
The golden rule of all distros is that "Your mileage may vary...".