home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!news.UVic.CA!sanjuan!pmacdona
- From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
- Subject: Re: Which is better for novice??? SLS or MCC-INTERIM!!!
- Message-ID: <1992Nov11.212330.608@sol.UVic.CA>
- Sender: news@sol.UVic.CA
- Nntp-Posting-Host: sanjuan.uvic.ca
- Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. CANADA
- References: <1992Nov9.063005.27308@csu.edu.au> <1992Nov10.200935.507@victrola.sea.wa.us>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:23:30 GMT
- Lines: 58
-
- In article <1992Nov10.200935.507@victrola.sea.wa.us> vince@victrola.sea.wa.us (Vince Skahan) writes:
- >u9030062@golum.riv.csu.edu.au ("Ronald Ku") writes:
- >> For a novice of linux like me, I am confused by SLS and
- >>MCC-INTERIM versions of linux. In some of the README files in many sites
- >>recommend to install SLS or MCC-INTERIM for the first time. But what is
- >>the different between these two versions of linux? Are they the clones of
- >>the "real linux"?
- >
- >> SLS seem to be more compete and welly organise. Is it better
- >>than MCC-INTERIM in performance and portability? Could anyone advice me
- >>which one should I start with and what would be the advantages?
- >
- >my experience (for what little it's worth :-)) is that mcc-interim seems
- >more stable. However, it's basically an o/s package and doesn't have the
- >extras (mail, uucp, gnu, x, etc...) that SLS has.
- >
-
- SLS may seem less stable because you see more posts about it, but there
- could be another reason: maybe more people are using it.
- From Teds posting of Mid October:
-
-
- > Top 15 Most Popular Archive Sections By Bytes Transferred
- > ---- Percent of ----
- > Archive Section Files Sent Bytes Sent Files Sent Bytes Sent
- > ------------------------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ----------
- > pub/linux/packages/SLS 3408 1099775360 50.11 50.36
- > pub/linux/packages 19 288390238 0.28 13.21
- > pub/linux/packages/GCC 814 287096369 11.97 13.15
- > pub/linux/packages/X11 384 221662483 5.65 10.15
- > pub/linux/mirrors/mcc-int 71 29282074 1.04 1.34
- > pub/linux/docs 139 23600002 2.04 1.08
- > pub/linux/packages/TeX 53 20413127 0.78 0.93
- > pub/linux/sources/usr.bin 66 20392458 0.97 0.93
- > pub/linux 186 20131222 2.73 0.92
- > pub/linux/images 73 19950848 1.07 0.91
- > pub/linux/sources/system 85 18696914 1.25 0.86
- > pub/linux/packages/lisp 27 17626303 0.40 0.81
- > pub/linux/packages/emacs- 57 16671741 0.84 0.76
- > pub/linux/binaries/usr.bi 107 15651344 1.57 0.72
- > pub/linux/binaries/usr.bi 54 9803411 0.79 0.45
-
-
- It would seem that there are 50 times more traffic on the SLS than MCC.
- Not to knock MCC, its a fine package and SLS even contains some parts
- from it. And of course this could mean that most people get MCC from its
- source archive than tsx-11. Also SLS is bigger than MCC.
-
- It should also be noted that SLS is also much more evolutionary. Patches
- and new components appear regularly, so that people can stay current just
- by downloading the new components. Unfortunately, not everyone is so
- diligent about keeping up with the latest patches, so the result is that
- even a month after a problem is fixed, we keep seeing posts about it.
- Case in point: "shell-init" and permission denied because no-read for
- non-root users on /.
-
- Peter
- pmacdona@sanjuan.uvic.ca
-