All being well, after my first ALUG meeting at Aylsham, I hope to come to the May
21 meeting, but, will be bringing the same hangers-on (!?) as I did in Aylsham
(non-computer buffs) - my wife and small dog Roger. Is Roger allowed in UEA grounds
( we always clear up extraneous products as any owner should!)? If not I will come
again when possible as June 18th is a no-no, though Sylham is very convenient for
me.
Cheers
Terry
Beccles, Suffolk
alug-digest(a)stu.uea.ac.uk wrote:
> This is a digest of the list alug(a)stu.uea.ac.uk
> The views expressed are those of the author, not necessarily
> those of UEA or UUEAS.
>
> 6 messages in this digest:
> Re: [alug] Mandrake
> Re: [alug] Mandrake
> Re: [alug] Mandrake
> Re: [alug] Mandrake
> Re: [alug] June meeting booked
> Alug 29
>
> === MESSAGE 1 ===
> Subject: Re: [alug] Mandrake
> From: MJ Ray <markj(a)oplex.thebrickhouse.co.uk>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 01:44:55 +0100
>
> Adrian Kiddle wrote:
> >itself correctly for my soundcard, but at the end of the day I felt safer
> >with Red Hat (being a relative newbie to Linux).
>
> Now this surprises me: every time I've seen a RedHat release, it has
> been broken in some way(s) and there's no sign that things are getting
> any better with it. The documentation that comes with it has also
> left me unimpressed, but that's a general problem apart from Debian
> (which is too steep a learning curve for most newbies, IMO) and SuSE.
> Why do you feel safer with it? Is it just because an increasing
> number of authors are documenting RedHat instead of Linux?
>
> (Don't get me wrong: everyone is free to use whatever they want, but
> I've normally pointed newbies away from RedHat towards SuSE or
> Mandrake because RedHat is usually broken. If that's wrong, I
> probably ought to know why.)
>
> --
> | MJR "Everything is planned, from
> -- crime to leisure time."
>
> === MESSAGE 2 ===
> Subject: Re: [alug] Mandrake
> From: MJ Ray <markj(a)oplex.thebrickhouse.co.uk>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 01:45:59 +0100
>
> simon wrote:
> >I don't get any of this hassle, my version of Mandrake uses red hat 6.5, the
> >system does not take that much longer to boot than OS/2 or MS windows whatever
> >it is, but the longer time is the price you pay for a system that does
> >the job properly (someone should explain this to Mrs Gate's boy).
>
> Is now a good time to point out how much faster a BSD-style init
> system comes up (eg on slackware) than a SysV one (as used on Redhat,
> Debian et al)? Probably not, but my old system boots in around 30s
> with all services running ;-)
>
> Back to the point in hand: I did try Mandrake a while back during my
> multiple re-installs (it was at 6.something), but as I haven't used an
> RPM-based system for a couple of years now, I found the documentation
> I was given after installing was practically non-existant and I
> couldn't get the system tailored to how I wanted. It was very slick,
> though, and I'd rate it as alongside Storm for ease of installation,
> ahead of most of the established distributions.
>
> --
> | MJR "Everything is planned, from
> -- crime to leisure time."
>
> === MESSAGE 3 ===
> Subject: Re: [alug] Mandrake
> From: Paul Russell <Paul.Russell(a)uea.ac.uk>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 10:05:07 +0100
>
> On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 07:02:36PM +0100, Green J M K wrote:
> > <pedant>
> > GIMP is not a GNOME application. It does not require it to run.
> > </pendant>
>
> Hmm... come in a pedantic swine, go out something to hang on a
> necklace?
>
> Hrm.. </pedant>. See, told you you didn't close it ;)
>
> Paul
>
> === MESSAGE 4 ===
> Subject: Re: [alug] Mandrake
> From: Laurie Brown <laurie(a)brownowl.com>
> Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 11:48:48 +0100
>
> MJ Ray wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
>
> > (Don't get me wrong: everyone is free to use whatever they want, but
> > I've normally pointed newbies away from RedHat towards SuSE or
> > Mandrake because RedHat is usually broken. If that's wrong, I
> > probably ought to know why.)
>
> Nope, it's not wrong. But then, as I'm an avowed SuSE-phile, you'd
> expect me to say that. I just find that SuSE gives me the best of all
> the worlds, which I accept is a compromise in some areas, but one I'm
> happy to make because overall, it's so much easier and thence more
> reliable.
>
> Cheers, Laurie.
>
> === MESSAGE 5 ===
> Subject: Re: [alug] June meeting booked
> From: Adam Bower <adamb(a)thebowery.co.uk>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 13:28:46 +0100
>
> On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 06:49:43PM +0100, John Woodard wrote:
> >
> > ALUG 8 or 30 depending on your numbering system is booked for Sunday 18th
> > June 2:00 - 6:30 at Syleham Village Hall as guests of the Syleham and
> > Wingfield Computer Club as before. More details nearer the time but it
> > would be an ideal venue for a guest speaker - stage, P.A. projector screen
> > etc.
> >
>
> I hope to be coming, but I'm moving to Cambridge this weekend as I have a new
> job, I belive there is a Cambridge Lug though so maybe I could contact them and
> do a tie in meeting or something?
>
> Adam
>
> === MESSAGE 6 ===
> Subject: Alug 29
> From: Brett Parker <B.Parker(a)uea.ac.uk>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 15:38:59 +0100
>
> OK - the room has now been booked for Alug 29. Its in the same room at
> UEA as it has been held before and is booked for the 21 May. Mark said
> sommit bout a SuSE person and are they coming to this one or the next,
> seens as I haven't got a clue about this would someone please work out
> what he's going on about ;)
>
> Rite - its between 1400 and 1900 probably followed by bar, hope to see u
> all there.
>
> Brett
> (Ho hum, as usual there be the nice signs pointing the way from the car
> park)
[ This email came to you via the Anglian Linux User Group list ]
[ If you only wish to recieve event announcements, email the ]
[ SUBJECTs of "unsubscribe alug" and "subscribe alug-announce" ]
[ to listserver(a)stu.uea.ac.uk -- We do need your support, tho' ]