[Techtalk] Mandrake 9.2
hamster at hamsternet.org
Sat Oct 18 18:28:01 EST 2003
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:00:13 -0400
Brenda Bell <k15a-list-linuxchix at theotherbell.com> wrote:
> I'll explain... I've had a love/hate relationship as far as Drake releases
> go -- 7.0 was a little flaky, 7.1 was great, 8.1 was a little flaky, 8.2
> was great. I'm in the middle of building a new box with 9.1 which appears
> to be pretty good, but trying to decide whether I should do 9.2 instead
> since this box isn't yet running in production mode. Final configuration
> will include Apache2, qmail and general network services (smb, dhcp, ntp,
> That said... just wondering whether there was anything that struck you as
> being particularly bad (or good) and whether you had any install issues.
> My hardware is pretty standard (server-grade brand-name stuff, no weird
> end-user devices) so I've historically had great results with the .2
AHHHHH :-) Right. I get what you're asking.
Well, so far so good. There are no major changes between 9.1 and 9.2, unlike
the jump from the 8 to 9 series, where they rewrote a whole heap of stuff,
starting right from the installer through to all the drak* tools.
There's nothing really "new" in this release, its more a consolidation of
9.1 (as I guess a point release should be) as opposed to a heap of shiny new
Because I tend to follow Cooker, I see the changes from one release to
another far more grandually than someone who jumps from 9.1 to 9.2, so bear
that in mind when listening to me :-)
I had no install issues at all, as far as it doing anything wrong. My
personal grievances with the installer are more to do with usability than
The only negative thing I can say about mdk is its blasted nuisance of an
I havent included much detail here, if you want to know specifics, then let
me know. I'm happy to waffle on in great detail.
But in summary, I see no issues in installing 9.2, but this is a very
personal opinion cause I use mdk as a desktop, whereas you use it as a
More information about the Techtalk