Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 14:26:38 -0800 From: Joshua Uziel <uzi@suse.com> Message-ID: <20001123142638.L9383@gimp.org> Subject: Re: [suse-sparc] Re: [SLE] SuSE Sparc 7.0: stable?
* Chris Wareham <chris.wareham@catchword.com> [001123 09:00]:
> Bob Drzyzgula wrote:
> > This does sort of bring up the question, however, about
> > SuSE's plans for SPARClinux. Shortly after releasing it, it
> > was stated on this mailing list that SuSE's plans for the
> > future of this product would "depend on feedback". I'm sort
> > of wondering -- what sort of feedback would be required
> > for SuSE/SPARC to move ahead? Certainly they can't base
> > it on sales. I think that, if someone is going to pick a
> > Linux distribution for their SPARC machines, they would
> > like to have a reasonable expectation that the product
> > will be maintained and extended.
>
> So if anyone from SuSE is reading this mailing list, please
> consider your SPARC distribution as a loss leader if
> nothing else. I am sure there are other people like me who
> use a mixture of architectures and would like to
> standardise on one distribution.
I can relate completely to your desire to standardize on a distribution.
Before I joined SuSE (and before SuSE had a SPARC port of its
distribution), I was running completely on both Redhat and Debian,
because they had the what I felt were two best SPARC distributions. I'd
like to think that SuSE joins them as the top three. (And there's ports
of Caldera, Turbolinux, Mandrake and Slackware soon, so there are
choices... not to mention OpenBSD and NetBSD, and of course, Solaris).
For those who are standardized on RH and wish to stay that way, I would
suggest waiting at least until a month after the release of 7.1 for
Intel machines... sometimes their SPARC releases are delayed a bit.
Although I cannot comment on SuSE's plans for the SPARC port of the
distribution, I can say that my job is to work on all things SPARC/Linux
related for SuSE (and in general). Take this however you want... my
plan is to work on keeping things reasonably up to date and happy.
I'll see if I can get an official statement on this soon...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.0 : Wed Jun 06 2001 - 11:08:20 PDT