Hi, On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 11:21:46AM +1000, Jason Lim wrote:
[SNIP] > > Or maybe I don't understand your point ... if you're saying the hardware > > vendor should help you configure your software, I don't want to work > > where you work. > > No... I'm saying, for example, if a particular thing (eg. a motherboard) > doesn't work on Linux (maybe a driver issue), then the vendor does not > need to support you if you're not running one of their "officially > supported" distros. And if "officially supported" equals "has > certification", then I think Debian should get certified. I doubt Debian > can "go it alone"... maybe Redhat could get away without being certified, > simply because so many people run it. But if Debian can piggyback off > Redhat and join certifications with it, and thus get vendor support along > with Redhat, is that a bad thing? > > > Or are you talking about commercial software support? (Oracle, Check > > Point, Netcool :) If so, you're never going to call your _server_ > > vendor for that support, I'd think. Why would you? > > It was only an example. Please don't pick on the minor points... it's the > bigger picture I think we're all trying to focus on. I'm not just talking > about hardware... I'm talking about everything, from software (eg. DB, > Application software, etc.) to hardware (RAID cards, Video cards, etc.). Why do you seem to completely ignore the guy's point that the LSB is about *software* compatibility and is practically meaningless for *hardware*? I'd rather have LSB certification stay that way, instead leading hardware companies even further in the false belief that it means something for hardware as well. It's a much better overall situation when hardware companies learn to say, we support our hardware under stock kernel 2.4.x, x>=15, or any official kernel from RedHat, 7.1 and up. Our driver is included in the main tree. I repeat: the LSB has nothing to do with the level of hardware support you'll get, or shouldn't have. If vendors demand it for no good reason, we should try to educate them, instead of encouraging them to add even more of those horrible binary-only-drivers-with-unportable-redhat- specific-install scripts. Why do you make so much of a fuss about it? If there is a demand for Debian support in a troubleshooting and maintenance sense, then companies will offer that. Linux already has the critical mass, and it definitely doesn't seem to be much of a problem anymore to get commercial Debian troubleshooting and maintenance support. The only real reason I'd see to get LSB is to get Oracle officially supported, but as Oracle's choice for RedHat 'Advanced Server' is a political one anyway, I don't think that certification will help anything there. Otherwise they would already support Mandrake and SuSE. Nothing to gain by LSB certification there. And do you know any other piece of proprietary software that is so worthwile that Debian should work hard for official support? Remember, Debian's agenda is excellent Free Software first, and a 'successful' Linux distribution second. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info
pgpyD3WiUhm38.pgp
Description: PGP signature
