On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 10:57:06PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:25 -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 03:08:11AM +0000, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > [snip] > > Oops. You jumped from "second most common" to "second most important", as > > if they're synonymous. Maybe they are to some people, but that's not at all > > beyond debate: AMD64 will probably be supported by all serious > > distributions, > > while Debian is, from what I recall, the *only* way to get a sensible Unix > > installation on many of the less common systems. > > NetBSD?
'sensible' <ducks> That said, NetBSD often is not a good option, because they are mainly a source-based operating system whereas Debian is not. This is not to say that Debian is better than NetBSD, but both source-based and binary-based operating systems have their merits. -- EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER -- with thanks to fortune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]