RE: 7.1 is out soon

[Kalum / Grendel <kalum lintux cx>]

On  Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Bill Farrell commented thusly,

> I'm also used to the way RH installs; I've had EXCELLENT experience with
> their support;  and once installed, you can treat the machine like
> furniture.  It's there, it's running, it's doing its job without
> intervention.  Throw a doily on top for pretty.

What about Debian, if you try it once I think you will like it.

> I've tried SuSe and found it a bit weird, like a throwback to UnixWare where
> everything was in a strange places, called strange things, and the defaults
> were nowhere NEAR what a real, online, working shop would want. 

Again, Bill if you are looking for a stright out of the box distro debian
would do, its config file layout is much better and once you get used to
it its great.

> My impression? Fuhgeddaboudit!!! I prefer a known installation with a
> install-tune-and-go, where I can go from computer-qua-vegetable to
> server-in-production in about a half-hour.  

IIRC you failed to do it with that xinetd problem on RH 7.x ;) So pelase
dont give the impression that a RH distro out of the box is ready to go
online and it is better in satisfying peoples needs than any other.

>That simply hasn't happened with
> any other release of Linux I've tried so far.  Up time in the web and data
> warehousing business is your lifeblood.  One simply cannot take the risk to
> use ANYTHING but road-tested-and-proven-worthy products.

Another reason why the original poster should stick with suse, he tried it
and he likes it so its the one for him.
 
> I don't have time to c**k around with unravelling annoying mysteries in SuSe
> or any of the others, like why routes don't work right, how to add extra IP
> addresses to NICs, where and what did they call whatever.conf, and a host of
> other irritating issues.  And whyinhell do I want all the useless, extra
> CRAP software that gets installed with it?  I just want a server that
> serves, not a Fisher-Price BusyBox.

Many other people want something else, there are quite a lot of desktop
users of linux who dont care much about serving, they only want a
acceptable stable alternatice to M$ wincrap, with all the software to make
things tolerable.  

So I think calling this so called extra software "CRAP", is going to the
extreme and is not wise.

We need all the extra software, since the deafault things might not fit
us, we still dont have a browser to match Internet Explorer much as we
would hate to admit it, netiher do we have a functional GUI mailclient,
although progress is being made in this direction.

> In my book, that makes SuSe a good candidate for developers, hackers,
> trend-setters, and back-office machines that can tolerate the amount of
> fiddling required.  NOT on a production floor.  My machines need to be
> productive NOW, not tomorrow or the next day.

Many heavy sites are running suse too...and many sysadmins swear by it
just like you are doing so now about RH, so it really is a personal
taste.
 
> And God love Mandrake, but if I'm going to be buying RH anyway, I may as
> well get it right from the source.  WITH the correct support, thank you.

Time to get out your checkbook ;)
 
I still am surprised that there was not a slight comment about debian from
you Bill, its the ideal distro for the sysadmin and a person who knows
what he is doing.

> Answering the phone, returning calls, returning emails, "the little things
> that make a house a home"; that's my experience with RH.  A damnsight more
> than I've gotten from other vendors, whose typical answer is "sift through
> the website when you have hours and hours and you MIGHT find what you're
> looking for.  Otherwise, you're on your own."  Rain on that: I can get that
> treatment from M$ for even more money out the door.

Speaking of M$, one of my friends tried out XP and commented on its speed
and stability, it looks like M$ have got there act together ;)

There was a article on K5 too about this IIRC.....  
 
> I've stuck by RH since shortly before rel 5.  Each release I've tried has
> gotten better each time, save for 7.0.  Big Deal.  One bad apple don't spoil
> the whole barrel.  Come to think of it, 6.0 wasn't all-that, either.  

Naaaaah....6.x were good vintage ones, much better than 7.x :)

> And who puts ANYBODY's x.0 release into production?  Not if you treasure
> your business, you don't.  Ever.  One gets an x.0 release to see what's
> going to be in it when it grows up.  I like what I saw in 7.0 (just please,
> heavens, let them figure out the xinetd weirdness I wrote about before) and
> am just waiting for things to sort out a bit. 7.1 may be "it".

Please tell us your experience with 7.1

> For now, 6.2 with the updates work' fine, las' longtime.  At least one can

I too agree that the 6.x releases were the most memrobale ones.

> GET updates!  Try that with M$, either.  I've been the victim of M$'s
> "updates" more than once, thank you.  

There track record has improved with all fairness to them.

>I'll put my faith and my business in
> the hands of a company who've proven that they can bring something to market
> which actually works and is stable enough upon which to run an enterprise.


Many other companys which market lInux have proven this too time and
again, its not only RH that is in the buissnes you know ;)

> That, and a lot of other very large reasons my partner & I threw M$ out
> bodily.

IIRC, you still have MTA running on NT, or did you find a replacement for
unix and kick it out?

> Live 'n' let live, guys and gals.

Good advice :)
 
Best Wishes,
Grendel


-- 
.---------------------.---------------------.----{)--.
| /"__ ._ _  _  _| _ |`- grendel lintux cx -'(]__/|| |
| \__/ | (-'| |(_|(-'l_ `-===============-' [_]  .-: |
`--------------------------------------------/|\/| |-'

all your chix are belong to us.