[PlanetCCRMA] Gentoo vs FC

[Brad Fuller]

>>The long term strategy is to let up2date die and replace it with
>>> something else (like a graphical yum, or smart if it matures fast
>>> enough).
>>> --
>>    
>>
>
>Portage. Let's get Fernando interested in Gentoo instead. He could
>build the apps there and we download them using portage instead of
>apt/yum.
>
>I think it would be very cool since Gentoo supports many more apps than FC.
>  
>

Hey Mark,

Can you tell us what Gentoo has over FC from an audio perspective? I've 
only used Red Hat RH8, ES3, FC1/2/3 and Knoppix. So, I'm in the dark 
about it. Their website has some intriguing text, but the use of it by 
users, especially audio users, really tells the story.

Some questions off the top of my head:
*, how is "emerge --sync" different than apt-get or yum? They all seem 
to do basically the same thing.

* When you say that Gentoo supports many more apps than FC, do you mean 
it would be a superset of the support that FC3 has?  Would I miss _any_ 
of the apps I enjoy now from PlanetCCRMA (and beyond)?

* The gentoo website lists this as a feature: " Various optimized Linux 
kernels"
Does it include the latest real-time kernels that we get from 
PlanetCCRMA? Or is that a silly question?

* How is it's usb facilities? (I like that it support AMD64, but so does 
FC3. It's in the details that is a problem.)

It seems to me, from both FC and Gentoo sites, more people are working 
on FC than Gentoo. Don't know if that's good or bad. Could go either way ;-)

brad

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/planetccrma/attachments/20050403/86c15d37/attachment.html>