Subj : version numbers
To   : Lawrence Garvin
From : Francois Thunus
Date : Sun Oct 22 2000 12:44 am

 Hello !

21 Oct 00 14:16, Lawrence Garvin wrote to William McBrine:

 SQ>> I HAD kinda wondered "Gee, why'd they leap from 2 to 8 so quickly."
 FT>> to play catch up with Slackware ?
 LG>> I don't think so, Francois. At the time Slackware was still at v2.3
Lawrence, as pointed out by others, this was all a JOKE. OK ? I never thought 
it would start this kind of stupid thread like "mine is older than yours"... 
:-)

 LG> How RedHat got to version 5 before most of us even noticed the product
 LG> is yet another topic of interest, I suppose.
I personally discovered RH at 4.0, coming from SLS and then Slackware.
I followed until 5.2, then switched to SuSE, until at we we standardized on 
6.2.

 LG> RedHat 6.0 was only recently available,
defined recently. That was almost 2 years ago.
 LG>  and immediately followed up by RedHat v6.1; hopefully to rectify a
 LG> number of anomolies in /etc/rc.* file linkages concerning startup
 LG> scripts that were actually linked to the shutdown moniker.

RH has the bad habit to screw up completely *.0 versions. The cycle goes like 
this:
1) issue X.0 - get flak - very bad, should be labeled BETA.
2) one month later, issue X.1 Solves many problems, but still not quite it
3) issue X.2 : very good. stays current until next X comes out.

I have seen this with 4, 5, 6, and now 7.
There has never been either a 4.3, 5.3, or 6.3.

As said we are using 6.2 at work. It is quite stable. we will probably upgrade 
to 7.2 :-)

 Francois Thunus

"It's a mistake to try and understand mathematics." -- Slartibartfast

 2:270/25.2@fidonet                           |  Views expressed here
 francois(at)TeleMatique(dot)org              |  are strictly my own.
 http://www.telematique.org/ft                |  (unless otherwise stated)

--- FMailX 1.48b
 * Origin:  Xara Sto Pragma ! Gasperich - Luxembourg -> (FidoNet 2:270/25.2)

.