--- Feizhou <feizhou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dave K wrote:
> > On 7/25/07, Chris Mauritz <chrism@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I agree completely. I don't see any real
> showstoppers that would
> >> prevent it from being a fine desktop. There are
> a few extras that I'd
> >> want to grab from the Fedora repos, but you can't
> beat the
> >> cost/stability/speedy updates/7 year EOL with a
> stick.
> >
> > I agree, but I think the earlier comments have
> some validity though.
> > It would be far more useful if certain key apps
> (e.g. FireFox and
> > OpenOffice, I'm sure each of us has their own "key
> app" list) were
> > kept up-to-date, perhaps in an alternative repo.
> And for supporting a
> > large deployment, they need to be a repo,
> building/installing manually
> > just isn't an option.
> >
>
> Man, you have the Centos plus repo, and if that does
> not make you happy,
> you have all the tools you need to roll your own
> repo. What is this
> about building/installing manually?
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
hello,
i am not sure if this is a concern, but if you are
running x86_64 desktop systems then i would suggest
putting the 32 bit centos. this will make life a lot
more pleasant for you when installing firefox and
other apps. if it is x86 then carry on :)
my .02 cents
Steven
Get your Art Supplies @ www.littleartstore.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
