Re: [gentoo-user] A Bit of Trivia

On Sun, 1 Jan 2006, Philip Webb wrote:

> 060101 Chris White wrote:
>> On Saturday 31 December 2005 22:35, C. Beamer wrote:
>>> Fedora: 3.45
>>> *Gentoo: 3.75*
>>> Mandriva: 3.70
>>> Suse: 3.40
>>> Ubuntu: 3.90
>> Word of advice, things like this are generally flawed.
>
> Quite true, but I believe CB's point was simply
> that Gentoo is up there with the other well-known distros for usability.
>
>> The best distro for your needs is the one
>> that best suits what you expect your system to do.
>
> Again, people out there should know that Gentoo may well be that distro.
> Gentoo is not difficult, but requires on-going attention & input from users:
> in return, you get a system which you can tune to do just what you want.
>
> My own recent experience trying to update the OS in my back-up machine was
> that Mandriva 2006 wouldn't install, Kubuntu could not be configured,
> as it refused to recognise the password (it uses the same for user & root),
> while Suse required downloading & writing  5  ISO's;
> Ubuntu, of course, is only for those who are willing to use Gnome.
> Finally, I got Mandriva 2005 installed & working well enough,
> but only with a lot of time & effort (the machine too slow for Gentoo).
>
> OTOH I've been using Gentoo in my main box without problems since 031005
> & have a fully upto-date environment which does just what I want it to do.
>
> Gentoo is probably suitable for a lot more users than realise it.

How slow is too slow for Gentoo? I'm using Gentoo on a 233MHz laptop.
It's not fast, but it's perfectly adequate. Install did take over a
week, I'll admit.

I'm curious because I seem to do a lot of squeezing the most out of
underpowered computers, and Gentoo has been my friend in these projects.
I would like to know what conditions are not well suited to Gentoo.

Michael
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list