| 1 |
On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 10:15, jed lane wrote: |
| 2 |
> 1.) Gentoo sounds very similar in aproach to SGL, is there fundamental differences? |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> 2.) If u know, what may be some pros/cons of one over the other? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> 3.) Is Gentoo still very much in an early developmental state or would u say it's no less developed than SGL? |
| 7 |
> (Other people have put forward their main argument for not going for gentoo as: "It's still in a early developmental stage, compared to SGL.") |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Although I have relatively little experiene with Linux, I have watched it from the periphery for 5yrs. Just recently, I have been researching alternative distros and have decided a source-based distro is what i want to get into. I understand considerably more "tech prowess" is going to b required to come to terms with |
| 11 |
> Gentoo and the like, compared to the mainstream distros: Mandrake, RH, SuSE. However, this is one of my main reasons for avoiding the big 3! I want to get my hands dirty and develop a more in-depth understanding of "Linux's" (in the generic sense) internals. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Sincerely, |
| 15 |
> jedLane |
| 16 |
Well, I found Gentoo by accident, reading one of the posts on SGL list. |
| 17 |
I never installed SGL, but from what I'v seen on their list, |
| 18 |
Sourcery breaks all the time, not much testing done etc. |
| 19 |
My understanding is that "having the latest version of every package" is |
| 20 |
one of the main goals of SGL. With no proper development process, and |
| 21 |
single branch(i.e. there's no stable/development versions) the overall |
| 22 |
SGL stability is much lower then that of Gentoo. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
/Vitaly |
Archives