[conspire] Upcoming meeting dates

[Daniel Gimpelevich]

Here are a couple of selected relevant quotes from the SuSE website:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's the Difference Between the CD and DVD Edition

The DVD edition contains the complete 64-bit version of SUSE Linux 10.0 as
well as a streamlined 32bit version of the software. The CD edition
contains a complete 32-bit version of SUSE Linux 10.0. Approximately 450
additional packages not available on the 32-bit version included on the
downloadable DVD image. These additional packages are mostly language
packages for applications and development versions of various software
libraries.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUSE Linux 10.0 Eval version

Alternatively, download the Eval DVD ISO image. It includes an installable
evaluation version that can be later upgraded to the complete product.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One major problem with installing SuSE 10 is that the ide-generic driver
is built as a module, both in the installer and in the installed system.
This is a driver needed on quite a few systems to see the CD drive to
install from, and it is not autoloaded. One must use a kernel argument
when booting the installer, such as insmod=ide-generic, to get it to
install at all, and once it's installed, it won't boot until you rebuild
the initrd for the stock kernel with that module included.

Installing from the 5 downloaded CDs on such a system, an added problem
appeared: When it asked for the second CD, it wouldn't recognize the
second CD upon insertion even though the md5sum matched, making it
impossible to complete the installation.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:24:35 -0700, Adrien Lamothe wrote:

> Hi Peter and Rick,
> 
> Yes, I was very unimpressed with the "Eval" SuSE 10.0,
> it was very bad. Thankfully, it didn't mess up my SuSE
> 9.3 installation.
> 
> I'm not convinced that the "Eval" 10.0 is the same as
> the packaged version (available at Fry's for $59.95.)
> The "Eval" lacked decent fonts while installing, I
> have a hard time believing it has taken such a step
> backward.
> 
> It appears SuSE went to version 10.0 because of the
> new community process. None of the software components
> are significantly newer than in 9.3. I'm very happy
> with 9.3 and plan on staying with it for a long time.
> I'm looking forward to KDE 4.0 (will be based on QT
> 4.0), but it looks to be at least one year away.
> 
> Regarding multimedia, I think it is a problem with
> Linux in general, especially on older hardware. On my
> dual-boot system, Winamp sounds much better under
> Windows than it does under Linux, it is the same old
> driver issue.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Adrien Lamothe
> www.adriensweb.com
> 
> "The revolution will not be televised. The monkeys
> will be removed from the thrones and placed back into
> their cages."
> 
> 
> --- Peter Knaggs <peter.knaggs at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/24/05, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
>> > Adrian tried out SUSE Linux 10.0 Eval Edition for
>> i386 (5 CDs), one of
>> > two successors[1] to SUSE Linux 9.3 Professional
>> Edition, but so far has
>> > been very unimpressed by its quality control
>> during installation to his
>> > laptop.
>> 
>> I also tried SuSE 10.0 (RC1 at the time) on
>> a Toshiba Tecra 9000 laptop, and found it to
>> still have quite a few of rough edges
>> compared to SuSE 9.3 on the same machine.
>> 
>> At the time, apt support for 10.0 isn't there
>> yet, so to get any audio or video would have
>> involved a lot of building from source, as
>> SuSE 10.0 seems to be sticking with the
>> no-multimedia policy.
>> 
>> I intrepidly tried a YOU update, to get
>> a security update, but the result was a broken
>> Firefox.
>> 
>> Wireless and software suspend worked,
>> but not as well as they work in Debian-based
>> Kanotix 2005_03, which is still what the
>> laptop feels happiest running.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > Don't be nervous:  If you for some reason are
>> considering RHEL, you probably want CentOS instead:
>> 
>> Indeed. Especially if you want timely
>> support for things oracle databases tend
>> to need, like the asmlib kernel module.
>> The following page provided asmlib for
>> CentOS more than three months before it was
>> available for the "real" RHEL4.
>>
> http://www.idevelopment.info/data/Oracle/DBA_tips/Oracle10gRAC/Install10gR2RACOnCentOS42/
>> 
>> Peter.