Jump to content

Mandriva doing too much stuff


Guest Adriano1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Adriano1

Am I the only one feeling Mandriva's doing too many things at once at this point? Or perhaps, that they're not focusing on improving their deficiencies? I mean, the conectiva merger, the changes in distribution (going from once every 6 months to once a year, etc), etc... I feel like they might be going back to where they were a few years ago. Somehow they're back, I feel, to talking too much. Maybe it's the engineer geek in me, but I feel they should concentrate on improving the distro and the support for it... Of course, that doesn't make as much publicity impact as merging with Conectiva, but in the long run it would obviously be better.

 

Or maybe I'm wrong and they are addressing such issues. Who knows. If they did, I wouldn't want them wasting their time and focus on telling me, but then I wouldn't know, and _then_ I'd be doing what I do now. In Spanish: "No hay una que me venga bien"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you ask me, i do have the feeling that they know exactly what they are doing. merging with conectiva is part one, adding conectivas strengths to mandrake is part two and changing the release cycle give me the impression that they are much more willing to create a rock stable distro than ever before. i think some instabilities that some people complained about (i never had any serious ones) could not be addressed to in detail because of the tight schedule.

 

if you have to throw out a new distro every six months, then you somehow lack the time and manpower to remove all bugs. now with the manpower of conectiva added and the additional time for every distro, the system will have a higher quality value imho. and it will make support services easier for them, especially in the business area.

 

sounds like a real masterplan to me. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the management of Mandrakesoft knows what they are doing. A company doesn't just merge with another just after they went into black bookkeeping wise. I think they realize that making a stable distro will be more important than going cutting edge. A stable distro that doesn't cost an arm and a leg will be more useful to a small to middle sized businesses (where I think the new Mandrivasoft is aiming right now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides, to all the people worried about 'cutting edge', nobody prohibits you to keep your os cutting edge.

I have Gimp-2.2, lates xorg, and KDE 3.4 . How much more cutting edge you want to be?

And this is on 10.1 OE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Adriano1

Well, I do acknowledge that a distro a year should make for a more stable release. Plus, writing from 10.2 rc2 and not noticing problems yet makes me feel better about this. I'll have to see how this turns out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to change back to 10.1 from rc2 due to the kernel not supporting my VMware (the other way around actually) and I was afraid to run the new mdk on an older kernel than it was designed for. I need a stable system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Adriano1

I've just started an urpmi --auto --auto-select on cooker... I hope I survive it :-)

 

Seriously, I like this distro. It's been my first and my best distro, holding my hand through so many things...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Adriano1

Yes, it does make Mandriva look like an enterprising firm. Still, as I said above, if this results in more stability for the distro, I'll be _extremely_ happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, other than the horrible name, I think mandriva is realy heading the right way. And anual release cycle 'should' mean more stable releases. Look how often Debian has an official stable release. We're at what, 3 years now? Debian is a rock. It's an outdated rock, but a rock none the less.

 

I am nervous about the addition of tech from conectiva. I think it's a good thing, but I'm nervous. It shows that the folks at mandriva are smart enough to know that there is always room to improve and taking help from another distro (even if you have to buy-out that distro) can make your distro better. It's a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

apt for rpm has been used by fedora-users for a very long time and yoper uses it as default packaging system since over two years now. it is pretty stable and solves dependencies quite well, although it is still inferior to the apt-get for debian packages imho. (rpms seem to be somehow more "tricky" as debs...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I have never used apt-rpm, my question to you -> is it better than urpmi?

hard to tell... it is... different. it is a bit like asking: which potatoes are better? hard or soft-cooking ones? ;)

Is there any good resource where package managers are compared?

(don't google, only if you know)

no idea....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...