In comp.os.linux.setup Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>:
> Mark <spamrs_goodbye@x.none> wrote:

>> Redhat 9 doesn't look *that* unmaintained, look at the
>> time stamps:

>> http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/9/updates/i386/

>> Sure the kernels use the 2.4.20-X version numbers but
>> it's feature patched forward by RH to have much of the stuff
>> in even the 2.6 kernels.

> I certainly don't want to rain on any volunteers' parade, and salute the
> Fedora Legacy people even attempting that quite daunting task, but
> consensus seems to be that they have not been able to do an adequate
> job, and the resulting systems still have serious security problems.
> (You may want to read the archives of Linux Weekly News on that topic.)

> I would certainly hasten to point RH9 diehards to Fedora Legacy,
> otherwise. As it is, I cannot in good conscience, and attempt to send
> them to CentOS, instead.

Fedora Legacy is certainly a good idea for people who can't
upgrade running systems for whatever reason in a timely fashion.

However, the OP is asking about a *FRESH* installation, it is
beyond me why people recommend some EOL distro? Though it might
well be, they are using doze and have never ever heard about
patches?

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 65: system needs to be rebooted

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 at 03:19 GMT, Rick Moen eloquently wrote:
> Mark <spamrs_goodbye@x.none> wrote:
>
>> Redhat 9 doesn't look *that* unmaintained, look at the
>> time stamps:
>>
>> http://download.fedoralegacy.org/redhat/9/updates/i386/
>>
>> Sure the kernels use the 2.4.20-X version numbers but
>> it's feature patched forward by RH to have much of the stuff
>> in even the 2.6 kernels.
>
> I certainly don't want to rain on any volunteers' parade, and salute the
> Fedora Legacy people even attempting that quite daunting task, but
> consensus seems to be that they have not been able to do an adequate
> job, and the resulting systems still have serious security problems.
> (You may want to read the archives of Linux Weekly News on that topic.)
>
> I would certainly hasten to point RH9 diehards to Fedora Legacy,
> otherwise. As it is, I cannot in good conscience, and attempt to send
> them to CentOS, instead.
And for those who do not know, Fedora Legacy support for RH9,
FC1 & 2 is soon going to end. Please see http://www.fedoralegacy.org/
for the news.

N.Emile...
--
Registered Linux User # 125653 (http://counter.li.org) | Please remove
Certified: 75% bastard, 42% of which is tard. | '.invalid'
http://www.thespark.com/bastardtest | to reply.
Switch to: http://www.speakeasy.net/refer/190653

12 Sep 2006 01:05 UTC, King Beowulf typed:
> I recommend Slackware. I ran it on everything from a 486 with 4MB RAM
> to AMD64 with 1 GB RAM at one time or another - single and multiboot.
> It is stable and scales well for older machines. Version 10.2 and
> version 11.0 is "imminent"

Seconded.

....and I've yet to encounter a binary distro that gets you up and running
faster than Slackware.

--
Email: Martin Fenelon <fenm at freeuk dot com>