[svlug] RH dependencies, not using up2date

Drew Bertola drew at drewb.com
Tue Jul 30 12:00:26 PDT 2002

On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 12:09:16AM -0700, Rafael Skodlar,,, wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 11:01:37PM -0700, Drew Bertola wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 11:54:14PM -0700, Rafael Skodlar,,, wrote:
> > > Here is the answer with no answer:
> > 
> > More like the FUD.
> Why bother to comment?

That's easy to answer.  Your post  did nothing to help Linux.  It only
serviced your  frustration.  That's not what I  would call encouraging
if I  was a newbie deciding whether  or not to take  the Linux plunge.
Remember, your  posts will end up  in eternal archives for  all to see
using  a simple  search.  Please  don't  add to  the discouragement  a
newbie hears  daily from MS  and the like.   I don't go  around saying
"this [insert distro]  sucks and is absolute "hell"  to install / work
with."  I  say "I think it  would be better if  [inseert distro] fixed
this bug or added this feature."

What I mean is that I won't be dissapointed if you write genuine
negative feedback, so long as you support it with more than "I read on
a web-site somewhere..." or "I can't get my employer's choice of
distro to do [X] so it sucks."

This only adds FUD to newbies who face enough of that, and it doesn't
say anything for your skills as a sysadmin or bug reporter.

Now, if you would tell me what you were trying to accomplish
(compiling OS stuff is way too vague), I (and many others) would be
glad to help.

> Noise?  I did find a better solution, it's called Debian 3.0 at the
> moment. So far I have had better experience with it than
> RH7.[012]. No bloated code on my drive yet.

Yes, but that's not what your employer wanted.  For some jobs one is
better than the other.  Debian is certainly an excellent choice and I
would probably recommend them based on their current reputation.
(Again, I wouldn't base that recommendation on my experience 2 years
ago, or on some SVLUGers' experiences with apt-get'ting libraries in

> At the same time I'm very happy to read your (late) news about you
> being able to solve all problems with RPMs. I have my doubts about
> that and will use my right to express my opinions just like you do,
> but obviously we have different views.

I guess you're mistaking something you "read somewhere" with something
I wrote.  I never touched the subject of RPMs.

> You are dogs years behind SVLUG threads. Sometimes it pays to read
> the whole thread before jumping on most likely wrong conclusion and
> write rather offensive messages. In short, others expressed similar
> experience to mine and documented it well.

True.  This is late.  False, no one but you reported compilation bugs
in this thread (at the time of my reply).

> Nonsense.  I said specificaly that bug fixes should be free. I
> bought a box with expectation of working code and warranty on bugs
> for that code.

I don't remember ever having been asked to pay for a bug fix from Red
Hat.  They were always provided via FTP for free, when available.  Do
you contend otherwise?  Anyway, your assumption that there is a
warranty on the bugs is wrong.  Most of the software says, when you
check, "provided as is with no warranty..."  That is a very standard
statement to find in the open source license attached to the code.

> They could provide a decent tool (something Debian provides for
> example) for automatic access to bug fixes without asking for more
> money. Instead they torture you through ever changing location to
> errata on their website so you can't write a simple script to
> retrive the code.

I agree.  I hate RHN / and the RH update tool.  There are alternatives
in the works.  For now:

man wget, etc.

Reference URL:


Example URL:


+---------------------- T h e C o o p . n e t ----------------------+
| Drew Bertola         Hosting - Colocation      Tel:  408-738-8337 |
| TheCoop.net      Programming - Administration  Mob:  408-887-0426 |
| drew at thecoop.net    Open Source Specialists    http://thecoop.net |

More information about the svlug mailing list