Re: next stable

Andrew Sullivan (
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:52:47 -0400 (EDT)

Actually, then, I would argue that you should go with 1.6.x releases, or a
1.7.x snapshot.  (Sorry, folks, but 1.6.x was more finished, I would
argue, than any 1.7.x stuff.)  I've used 1.6 stuff to show off possible
configurations for use in our library, and they were favourably received.
In particular, using Zharf to put big labelled buttons on a locked-down
station for public use seemed to work nicely.  All I need now is a stable
web browser, and we'd be set.

Andrew Sullivan | (home)| (work)

On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Mitchell Ullman wrote:

> > 	On a related note, I'd be interested in knowing what you work uses
> > as it's window manager now - FVWM or twm would be the only other stable
> > window manager out there (releases that begine with a 0.x are development,
> > even though they don't call it so).  If it's CDE, then your entire OS is
> > not stable. ;)
> Well, don't yell, but they are using win95 and I am trying to get a linux
> section going.  I work in the university library ar Georgia Southern
> University.  I have to show that there is a usable interface for the morons(end
> users?) that come in and gennerally screw everything up... ;)  I may be going
> with (gasp) kde...  I can make it pretty close to the current configureation,
> but it is a bit hard on mem.  we would be running WordPerfect, Gimp, and of
> course, a whole slew of compilers, mostly c/c++and java.  I have a long way to
> go getting them to let me do all of this, as there is enough crap going on with
> the lack of intelligence in certain offices.  Thanks tho,
> mitchell
> --
>    WWW:
>    FTP:
>    MAIL: