From a brief poke around the /proc/ fs, it's clear the machines are easily capable of running something far more up to date. I would really
I was discussing the use of Linux at uni today. One of the main points I was asked to defend was essentially; "Why does Linux sucks so much?" This persons experience with Linux had pretty much centred round the R block, and G basement computers at uni - and I can't say I disagree with her. As far as I can make out, those computers are running some ancient version of Slackware (I think?) with GNOME 1.4, and KDE2. Most of the other WMs seem to be broken. Fonts are abysmal, and the default browser is Netscape 4. The CDRom/fstab is only correctly setup on some of the machines. Frankly, it's embarrassing. While I can understand that the uni staff don't exactly have time to be reinstalling Linux every six months, and that stability is very important, this is the same config that I was using when I attempted second year for the first time back in 2001. like to see something along the lines of GNOME 2.X, KDE3, a fairly recent version of say Mozilla, Galeon, or Konqueror, and for the love of god, decent fonts. Given the varsity centric nature of the WLUG, I'm hoping someone can tell me why the Linux machines are in such as sad state. Do the admins not care? Or have they simply forgotten what's running there. Regards Edward