You Wrote:
Date: 17 Jun 2002 13:02:07 -0400
From: "Ian C. Blenke" <icblenke@nks.net>
To: slug@nks.net
Subject: Re: Re: [SLUG] School Project - Not a Troll...consider Debian
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 10:59, awyatt@fewt.com wrote:
>>
>> I'm glad that's the case. Weren't they considering per box licensing
>> some time ago? Who other than you supports SUSE in the area? If you sell
>> SUSE to this school system and you decide to take your business and
>> leave the state, who will support them? Maybe it's just that buy
>> American side that says to give RH another chance, and stay as far from
>> deb/slack as you can. (Unless they have dedicated support staff.)
> And that is sad.
Unfortunately.
>> > I'll offer local support for SuSE! ...
>>
>> LOL, I'm not going to disagree with that, however it's not the point.
>> This school is very likely not going to be able to take care of itself
>> for some time. If you want to offer to support SUSE, hey that's great,
>> but who are you? Will you have time to drop whatever you are doing and
>> run to them when the server pukes? I highly doubt it.
>This is why the contributors to this particular project should use the
>distribution they feel most comfortable with. Honestly, I prefer debian,
>but if I'm not going to have the time over the next year to help them
>more than a few hours in my forever decreasing "free time", who am I to
>dictate the distro?
I agree.
>> > This argument also highlights a weakness that could destroy Linux as a
>> > viable corporate platform. If people are focusing on any distro(even
>> > my beloved SuSE) to the point where the fact that a system is RedHat
>> > or SuSE or Debian is more important than the fact that it is Linux,
>> > then the wonderful robustness of the community turns into a
>> > fragmented fork-fest. Look at the
>>
>> I disagree completely. If Debian, Suse, RedHat, Mandrake and every other
>> Linux distributor out there would fall in line and support a standard
>> the point of this discussion would be moot. However, RedHat is *THE*
>> distribution all of the big boys are supporting. That's just how it
>> is.
>What is their competitive edge in doing so? Why do I even care? ;)
Dunno.
>Companies should use Linux based on merit, how well it solves a business
>need.
Agreed.
>There is a large business backing in the states for RedHat, I'll agree.
>> UNIX fragmentation of the 70's and 80's; it can happen to Linux if we let it.
>Nah. I don't see it that way. The kernel is the kernel is the kernel.
Agreed.
>The GPL tools are forever evolving. In fact, I tend to think of Linux as
>an amorphous blob of bleeding edge GPLed software that happens to be
>packaged and shipped in different branded boxes. It really doesn't
>matter.
Unfortunately it does matter. Telnetd for example differs greatly between
Slack, SUSE, MDK, Caldera, and RH. This had broken one of my applications
at one time.
>Linux is as fragmented as it is likely to get. There are *hundreds* of
>distributions, most of them so small as to be generally ignored. Anyone
>can make their own "distribution". It's just a standard kernel with
>different user-space tools. That's it. Nothing more.
Linux yes, Linux distributions, I don't know.
>UNIX fragmentation was before Internet time. It happened over decades.
>Fragmentation now happens spontaneously - whenever someone decides to
>create their own distribution.
Agreed.
>> The major distributors are allowing it to happen. Take UnitedLinux,
>> when did they invite RH? Not months, but days before they announced
>>. Sorry, RH contributes more to Linux than all of the other distribtion
>> houses combined. (IMHO)
>I'm forever disgusted with RH's submissions back to the core packages.
>The sheer number of "fixes" and patches that never make it back to the
>original authors of numerous GPLed packages really bothers me. Have you
>tried getting support for a RH patched linux kernel on the lkm list?
>Good luck.
I'm sure, but their intentions are still good. They don't license their
code in such a way that you have to purchase their product to install it
properly, or legally. Every bit of code they have written makes it back
to the pool eventually.
>Yeah, they help grow the market, and I'm all for that, but it's so
>decidedly corporate that it rubs me the wrong way.
Agreed, but someone's gotta do it.
>> > Tying your companies fortunes to RedHat is no safer than tying your
>> > companies fortunes to Microsoft. One of our strengths used to be,
>> > "It
>>
>> I disagree, we are talking open solutions not closed proprietary garbage
>> that comes out of software houses such as MS.
>Redhat still gives me source code. With source code, I can support it.
That was my point exactly.
>> Linux is Linux is a kernel created in 1991. Sure, it'll survive.
>> No one is arguing that.
>I'll argue that it will continue to "evolve" as it has been. It is not
>merely "surviving". It is improving. If it ever stops doing so, it will
>perish. The community will not allow for stagnation, not on Internet
>time.
>> Since when does an RHCE not have to be educated? (Hint, that's what
>> you are emplying.) No RHCE will ever be crippled because they are
>> working on an open system.
>Or, rather, they should not be. This isn't to say that it isn't possible
>for a RHCE to have vendor tunnel-vision. However, for what it is worth,
>I've yet to meet a clueless RHCE so crippled in this regard.
>> Linux is Linux, I am a Linux Guru that enjoys a large paycheck.
>Lucky bugger.
Unfortunately Linux isn't my primary focus, I do get to use it for some
functions though. :-)
>> Linux is Linux, and I will continue to support the Distribution that
>> everyone else uses so I will continue to get a large paycheck.
>I'd like to get me some of that action ;)
haha!
>> In all my years as a Linux person (Circa 1996), I have only ever
>> heard of *1* SUSE installation and it was on a personal machine.
>Oh, I hear of many of them. Primarily mainframe installations. IBM is
>huge on SuSE/S390.
I concede that I have heard of these, but haven't had the pleasure of using one.
>It's also suprising the number of SLUG members that run SuSE. I'm not a
>bit proponent of any RPM distro, particularly SuSE, but it DOES have a
>huge following (much much larger than RedHat in fact, primarily in
>Europe).
I still need to get to one of those meetings LOL.
>> Every other system I have come in contact with was RedHat based with
>> the exception of the short stint watching Progeny Debian puke on
>> itself as I was testing it on a Netfinity 4500.
>You mean the kernel puking. This is why real admins hand-build their own
>kernels tuned to the hardware.
No, the installer puked. I didn't have the opportunity to roll my own kernel.
I normally use kernel.org kernels, but I'm pretty pleased with the kernel that
shipped with RH 7.3 (built my way of course).
>I'm not one to go whining to a vendor to fix my broken kernel. I'd much
>rather build a vanilla Linus kernel tuned for my hardware and report it
>on lkml with a stack trace and thorough debug of the module in question
>(if I didn't already find an answer on Google Groups with a few simple
>searches).
No, but I have no problem yelling at them to fix their busted old installer. The
kernel is a different story all together.
>> The market isn't wrong, RedHat is larger than all the other Linux
>> houses out there combined for a reason.
>Many would argue that SuSE is the largest. Just from sheer bulk (5000+
>packages on 6 CDs), SuSE does reign supreme ;)
LOL If you look at it based on packages, I'm talking marketshare. :-P haha
>> No, Windows is a commie plot from within. ;-)
>Windows is a Monopoly of the software marketplace devised by a visionary
>with the foresight to understand the VALUE of said software. At the
>time, this was true. The market, however, is rapidly changing.
MS at one time understood the value of software, and unfortunately lost that
focus preferring illegal activity to catering to consumer demand. (IMHO)
-Andrew
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 12:48:11 EDT