[svlug] Debian testing / unstable
raffi at linwin.com
Thu Nov 29 12:28:02 PST 2001
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 07:31:30AM -0800, Nate Campi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 12:01:46AM -0800, Drew Bertola wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 06:54:18PM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > > With RH, they once again broke compatibility in RPM, so RH 7 package can't
> > > even be manipulated with RH 6.x (unless you get a special patched RPM
> > > package)
> > Yeah, like you've got to walk to Durham and cut them a check for the
> > RPM? If that's a gripe, I don't get it.
> The cost of software in dollar terms often means little to a sysadmin.
> My company readily pays out huge sums of money for software it deems
> The thing is, I don't care of how much they spend on iPlanet or IIS,
> Apache is always easier to administer (reliability, flexibility, easy to
> edit text files, etc). Whether or not we paid for it is meaningless,
> it's the cost as far as maintaining it that bothers Marc.
> Money isn't everything ;)
A lot of money makes a difference in everything ;-)
One thing is important to keep in mind that RedHat is "the defacto Linux
standard"  to management and many marketing people.
 that's not necessarily GNU/Linux standard. You may strongly disagree
with me but the reality (the way I see it) is such. When you develop
software for Linux platform, the first one they ask you to support is
RedHat. I have yet to hear one sales guy come to me and say we need
Debian. And that's a reflection from what they hear from (potential)
And what's IBM  supporting? A product from a corporation that has a
proven business record not proven packaging software. It's good we always
look for something better and as long as we have alternatives to MS
proprietary products I'll be happy.
 That's not to be ignored you know.
By the way, I was told on many occassions that Debian is THE ANSWER.
However, my experience was somewhat disappointing. Unless you are careful
you can shot yourself in any part of the body much faster with Debian than
RedHat. I also see no reason to run cron job to update my server with some
(trusted?) code from the net as some have suggested.
Patches and security are better done manualy IMO. Just the idea of
installing someting from "unstable" tree makes me feel uneasy. That's just
for the OS part of code. Applications and other utilities are better done
some other way so that they fit on any distribution regardless of
packaging. It's not easy to keep track of packages for different
distributions on top of different versions. If nothing else it takes a lot
of disk space on central server.
> Nate Campi | Terra Lycos DNS | SF UNIX Operations | (415) 276-8678
> Remember: if brute force doesn't work, you're just not using enough.
# My login password is misspelled name of town 10 km from my birthplace
# and is subject to change without notice!
More information about the svlug