1. SuSE Linux - was test - ignore
irv mullins wrote:
> I don't have a dls modem, but
> chances are SuSE would recognise yours.
To be precise, Mandrake 10 did recognise the Alcatel modem, I just could not
get it to connect. This is after I was able to get it working on
Mandrake 9.2! Tech support was not able to help me get back online.
I found some Alcatel support files oriented toward SuSE on the net, therefore
I was just about to buy a copy of SuSE 9.1 when I BellSouth decided
to "give" me a Westel modem because I was such a good customer. I Wonder
if all the time I was using tech support contributed to their generosity.
I did have to buy an ethernet card, but after that connection was
instant.
>
> The other difference that I can see is that while Mandrake's install
> is so easy anyone can do it, SuSE's requires actually reading the
> screens and choosing some options now and then.
>
It also appears to me that a number of programs that interest me -
XFCE, GYachEnhanced (chat client), Skype - and others seem to be
primarily developed on SuSE. Mandrake may be the easiest Linux
to install for absolute newbies, but it appears to me that once
you want or need to dig a little deeper, SuSE might be a better choice.
I have been a dedicated Mandrake Linux user for gosh 6 years at least,
but I think when SuSE 9.2 is released, I'll switch.
Irv,
Are there any Euphoria specific installation issues of note for SuSE? My first
Linux installation years ago was Caldera and the ".bash_profile" was
named something slightly different.
Kenneth Rhodes
100% MicroSoft Free!
2. Re: SuSE Linux - was test - ignore
Ken Rhodes wrote:
> Irv,
> Are there any Euphoria specific installation issues of note for SuSE? My first
> Linux installation years ago was Caldera and the ".bash_profile" was
> named something slightly different.
SuSE uses .profile for the path, eudir, etc. rather than .bash_profile.
That's the only difference I found.
Irv
