[mythtv-users] Re: Fedora or RH9.0 for a new Myth installation ?

[Axel Thimm]

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 05:07:01PM -0700, pvrman at xemaps.com wrote:
> I didn't quite understand what you meant by better 3rd party support in 
> RH9. Are you saying that there are more hardware that is compatible with 
> RH9 than with Fedora ?
> 
> Or is it that there are more applications available today for RH9 than 
> for Fedora ? Is RH9 and Fedora binary compatible ? If so, the 
> applicaiton availability shouldn't be an issue, right ?

There are more 3rd party repos doing RH9 than FC1.

> I see your point with future support and understand that there will be 
> more support in Fedora going forward, but how does RH9 compare with FC1 
> as it stands TODAY ? Are they the same or would you sat RH9 has more 
> support ?

I'd consider them currently equal. Can't make a guess for the future,
many people have stayed at RH9 because they don't like the new fast
pace model of the FC series, another chunk is pleased to see fresher
apps in FC.

It all really depends on your application domain. For mythtv it won't
be really important, I guess.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20031221/abd66630/attachment.pgp