[O.T.] Ethics & Security [was Re: Debian VS. Red Hat + MS]

2000-09-15 Thread Jonathan D. Proulx
Hi, I think that software vendors need to take responsibility for the security implications of their products. I personally don't much care if visual basic script allows for the propogation of viruses that reformat your hard drive, that can go under "the trad offs you make" heading. But if rem

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat + MS

2000-09-14 Thread Mark Simos
I come from Windows background and am interested in learning unix/linux cause i am a nerd. For learning things, I come from the "drink from the firehouse" school of thought so I like Debian. its a little more hardcore, but still usable to me. I am still trying other flavors, but So far I prefer d

Re: Package configuration at installtime (was Re: Debian VS. Red Hat)

2000-09-14 Thread Jonathan D. Proulx
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 02:53:56PM -0400, Fraser Campbell wrote: :Jonathan D. Proulx wrote: :: : :At work we use almost exclusively RedHat because of the kickstart install :option. I can make a kickstart file, put configuration information in the :post install (of the kickstart) and with one

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread Jonathan D. Proulx
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 03:44:55PM +0200, Julio Merino wrote: :In Hurd you can replace any of the existing servers (disk filesystem :servers, network servers, etc.) without rebooting. The only thing you :can't change is the microkernel (gnumach) but that's not needed often ::) Just to see if I ca

Re: Debian vs Red Hat??? I need info.

2000-09-14 Thread Steve Lamb
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 06:29:01PM -0500, w trillich wrote: > "apropos"? okay, i'll try that... man -k is easier to type. :P > CONCLUSION: > there are #NO# pointers from a standard cd-install of slink, Of course not. Correct me if I'm wrong but apt didn't really come into its

Re: [OT] Switching kernels without reboot (was: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-14 Thread Leen Besselink
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Jason Quigley wrote: > This may be of interest: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html > Thank you but I already knew of it's existance, personally I think a little like Linus Torvalds, monolitic kernels are always gonna be faster then Microkernels. Although a mix of thi

Re: [OT] Switching kernels without reboot (was: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-14 Thread Jason Quigley
This may be of interest: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html Cheers, Jason. --On Thursday, September 14, 2000 14:50 +0200 Leen Besselink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: btw: Is it possible to switch kernels without rebooting. I cannot believe that's possible Actually, I think someone was

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread Julio Merino
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 04:31:51AM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 02:01:14PM +0200, Florian Friesdorf wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:49:04PM -0700, George Bonser wrote: > > > > > > Shoot, I ran from Buzz to Potato on one system until its disk died. Never > > > even re

[OT] Switching kernels without reboot (continued) (was: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-14 Thread Leen Besselink
I've not been at the OLSymposium but I did remember reading this about Werner Almesberger: http://www.ottawalinuxsymposium.org/2000/booting.html: "Booting Linux: The History and the Future The IA-32 Linux boot process has since 1991 evolved from using boot floppy to Shoelace and now LILO. We will

[OT] Switching kernels without reboot (was: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-14 Thread Leen Besselink
> btw: Is it possible to switch kernels without rebooting. > I cannot believe that's possible Actually, I think someone was working on that. Well, first he wants to make it so you can build an other kernel in userspace or something (this is already possible with special kernels). I think Solaris

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread Ethan Benson
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 02:01:14PM +0200, Florian Friesdorf wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:49:04PM -0700, George Bonser wrote: > > > > Shoot, I ran from Buzz to Potato on one system until its disk died. Never > > even rebooted except when the power failed. > > btw: Is it possible to switch k

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread Florian Friesdorf
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 11:49:04PM -0700, George Bonser wrote: > > Shoot, I ran from Buzz to Potato on one system until its disk died. Never > even rebooted except when the power failed. btw: Is it possible to switch kernels without rebooting. I cannot believe that's possible, however I cannot be

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread George Bonser
Shoot, I ran from Buzz to Potato on one system until its disk died. Never even rebooted except when the power failed. On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Rino Mardo wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:59:01PM -0300 or thereabouts, Ariel Manzur wrote: > > >How about the fact that it's more stable and doesn't n

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-14 Thread Rino Mardo
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:59:01PM -0300 or thereabouts, Ariel Manzur wrote: > >How about the fact that it's more stable and doesn't need to be > >reinstalled every time there's a new version? > > I had to reinstall my debian last time a new version came out.. reinstalled?!?? your missing alot.

Re: Package configuration at installtime (was Re: Debian VS. Red Hat)

2000-09-13 Thread Joey Hess
Fraser Campbell wrote: > It would be extremely useful if dpkg had a --default-config option or > something like that ... some way to ensure that packages install with > absolutely no prompting. Is there any way to do this now? If there were > it would be very easy to script a Debian install simil

Package configuration at installtime (was Re: Debian VS. Red Hat)

2000-09-13 Thread Fraser Campbell
Jonathan D. Proulx wrote: > Debian allows for configuration during package installation, so you > don't have to poke around so much to figure outwhat needs tweeking to > make your nifty ne app working. This is a great feature and (besides automated upgrades) one of the main reasons I started usin

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-13 Thread Stephan Hachinger
t came out. Kind Regards, Stephan Hachinger - Original Message - From: "Ariel Manzur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thomas J. Hamman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 9:59 PM Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat > At 23:42 04/09/2000 -0400, Th

Package configuration at installtime (was Re: Debian VS. Red Hat)

2000-09-13 Thread Fraser Campbell
Jonathan D. Proulx wrote: > Debian allows for configuration during package installation, so you > don't have to poke around so much to figure outwhat needs tweeking to > make your nifty ne app working. This is a great feature and (besides automated upgrades) one of the main reasons I started usin

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-13 Thread John L . Fjellstad
pgpkYfKxQA6Gm.pgp Description: PGP message

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-13 Thread Ariel Manzur
At 23:42 04/09/2000 -0400, Thomas J. Hamman wrote: >On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 09:54:15PM -0500, Wayne Sitton wrote: >> Here is the situation, I'm a Debian user. The company I work for, so far, >> will only allow Red Hat as it's Linux OS on it's servers. I need some good >> reasons to justify using

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-12 Thread montefin
"Jonathan D. Proulx" wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 01:05:49PM +1100, Peter Muirhead wrote: > :I will be the first person to be completely honest in this thread. > : > :I use Debian so I can take a higher moral ground over my friends. > > That is an excellent point :) > Well I use Red Hat so

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-12 Thread Jonathan D. Proulx
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 01:05:49PM +1100, Peter Muirhead wrote: :I will be the first person to be completely honest in this thread. : :I use Debian so I can take a higher moral ground over my friends. That is an excellent point :) Friends don't let friends use "Dead Rat"

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-12 Thread Peter Muirhead
ct: Re: Debian VS. Red Hat >On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 12:39:20AM +0200, I. Tura wrote: >: Actually I don't know your position in your work (I missed the full >: thread) > >the reasons I use Debian: > >apt-get update && apt-get upgrade = bye bye to many common security

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-12 Thread Jonathan D. Proulx
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 12:39:20AM +0200, I. Tura wrote: : Actually I don't know your position in your work (I missed the full : thread) the reasons I use Debian: apt-get update && apt-get upgrade = bye bye to many common security worries (many Debian folks get hit with the statd expl

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-12 Thread USM Bish
Actually, both of you are right in your own ways. The rpm is a gzipped cpio file with a few headers ... and therefore, plain and simple cpio cannot work. Alien is a perl script and is dependent upon external progs to do the actual work (where required). An RPM package file is divided in 4 logic

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread Ethan Benson
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:42:50AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "unlike rpm which you need to compile rpm to access a .rpm." > > I think not. I managed to open an .rpm using the Gnome file manager in a > debian-based installation. An .rpm appears to be a cpio archive. Correct me, > folks, if

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread I. Tura
Actually I don't know your position in your work (I missed the full thread) but a simple suggestion: If you can be root there, why don't you install both, install a minimal set of programs for your work in RH, and progressively use more Debian... until leaving RH rotting in its pa

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread Bruce Richardson
msg.pgp Description: PGP message

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread csj
"unlike rpm which you need to compile rpm to access a .rpm." I think not. I managed to open an .rpm using the Gnome file manager in a debian-based installation. An .rpm appears to be a cpio archive. Correct me, folks, if this is misinformation. Besides, you can always "alien"-ate an .rpm On Mon,

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread Sven Burgener
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:02:45AM -0500, William Jensen wrote: > > Maybe the software in the distributions is about the same, but the > > distros themselves sure aren't. Right. > Support. OH yes support. The first time I set up RH (first linux ever) I > naturally had some problems and question

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread William Jensen
On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 10:43:30AM +0200, Christian Pernegger wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: John L . Fjellstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:43 AM > > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > Subject: Re: Debian VS.

RE: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread Christian Pernegger
> -Original Message- > From: John L . Fjellstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 8:43 AM > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Debian VS. Red Hat > > [...] It just seems that every time there is > a discussion of distributio

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread George Bonser
> > I'd take any sweeping generalization as to the stability of a distro > with a grain of salt, especially when I don't know if the one doing > the reporting has longtime and wide ranging experience with a number of > distributions on various hardware combinations. Having had some experiance wit

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread Bruce Sass
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, John L . Fjellstad wrote: > Well, if you want stability and security, having used both, I must say, > both are pretty much the same. I still aren't convinced that Debian > is somehow more stable than Redhat. Doesn't make sense. Enlightenment > 0.16.3 doesn't magically become

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-11 Thread John L . Fjellstad
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:48:29PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm not berating people because of the Distro they Choose. Well, I wasn't accusing you. It just seems that every time there is a discussion of distribution, people are forgetting the fact that the distributions aren't that diff

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread Rino Mardo
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:48:29PM -0500 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > greatest packages if I have to sacrifice stability. Debian is the most > stable system I know, so that is what I want to use. My original question, is > how do I convince them of what I already know? > > Wayne

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread Chris Jenks
At 01:58 PM 9/10/00 -0700, John L . Fjellstad wrote: >On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 10:06:59AM -0400, Chris Jenks wrote: > > >> Which also goes back to Wayne's comment on RH being better because it's >> more popular. > >Also, preinstall has a lot to say, too. That said, berating people >because of the

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread Ethan Benson
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:58:45PM -0700, John L . Fjellstad wrote: [snip] > distributions can't start using debs. Heck, every major version of > RPM is incompatible with previous version anyways. Reason I switched is > because the RPM used in 6.x (v3.x) can't read packages for 7 (v4). > Now, I do

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread techlists
> > Which also goes back to Wayne's comment on RH being better because it's > > more popular.=20 > > Well, the reason I got RedHat initially was because that was the > only version of Linux at the local Fry's (or was it CompUSA?) store. > Today's newbies can choose between alot more distribution

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread John L . Fjellstad
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 10:06:59AM -0400, Chris Jenks wrote: > >From what I have seen since this thread started, IMHO, is that a lot of RH > users that have > switched to Debian enjoy Debian more. Now this might be geek like, or gump > like I'm not > sure, Well, the reason I enjoy Debian more

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-10 Thread Chris Jenks
At 11:45 PM 9/8/00 -0700, John L . Fjellstad wrote: >On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 12:05:32PM -0500, Wayne Sitton wrote: >> OK guys, I think you've gotten off the subject that I needed. Although >> what you have given me is great, what I need now is kind of like stories >> of thing that have happened to

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread Antonio Rodriguez
Add to that that if you apt-move it afterwards, you can get your own partial upgrade repository (even on CD)! Jeff Green wrote: > kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > > A cronned apt-get upgrade might be a bit much, and I myself only do > > "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade --download-only". This

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread Jeff Green
kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > A cronned apt-get upgrade might be a bit much, and I myself only do > "apt-get update && apt-get upgrade --download-only". This parks updates > in /var/cache/apt/archives, but doesn't install packages until > requested manually by me on the command line. > Now th

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread kmself
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 10:18:41PM -0500, Will Trillich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:41:59PM +0100, Jeff Green wrote: > > I resent the implication that we sysadmins ever think at all! And that > > even if we did we had brains with which to accomplish the task. > > Jeff >

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread Jeff Green
-Original Message- From: Will Trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: 09 September 2000 04:17 Subject: Re: Debian VS. Red Hat >On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:41:59PM +0100, Jeff Green wrote: >> I resent the implication that we sysadmins ever th

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread Gregg C
ths now, but I never seem to get around to it. From: Will Trillich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Debian VS. Red Hat Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 22:18:41 -0500 On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:41:59PM +0100, Jeff Green wrote: > I resent the implication that w

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread John L . Fjellstad
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:41:57AM -0400, Paul McHale wrote: > The largest difference I know of is the dependency resolution. Maybe Redhat > will do this as well. Well, I don't know how dpkg works yet, but rpm is limited by what the author wants. Sometimes it give really frustrating depencies

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread CaT
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:41:57AM -0400, Paul McHale wrote: > BTW. It's remarkable how similar in functionality windows update is to > debian's apt-get. It is more twinkified (which isn't always bad ...) but > functionally very similar. It is, of course, limited to Microsoft products. Indeed.

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread John L . Fjellstad
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 12:05:32PM -0500, Wayne Sitton wrote: > OK guys, I think you've gotten off the subject that I needed. Although > what you have given me is great, what I need now is kind of like stories > of thing that have happened to show why Debian would be better. Or, > even links to s

RE: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread Paul McHale
> > and (getting back to the original question of red hat vs. debian) > > does red-hat have anything comparable? > > The big difference, AFAIK, is that Debian store a lot more packages. > With Redhat, you can get the base install (that comes with the CD), > but for the rest, you would have to go f

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-09 Thread John L . Fjellstad
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 10:18:41PM -0500, Will Trillich wrote: > and (getting back to the original question of red hat vs. debian) > does red-hat have anything comparable? I think Redhat has something called rpm-update, but I have never tried it. That service you have to pay for, I think. Ther

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-08 Thread s. keeling
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 01:26:16PM +0200, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 02:37:03PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > > > Bruce Sass writes: > > > I want to be able to manually add and edit entries in the DB (i.e., given > > > > I'm not convinced that you can write a special b

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread CaT
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 08:23:23PM -0700, John L . Fjellstad wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:11:11AM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > > That's why I migrated to it last year after 2.5 years of RH hell. > > I beat around the bush for 4 years before changing last month:-) Ha! My first linux

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread CaT
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 10:18:41PM -0500, Will Trillich wrote: > > Incidentally the best reason I can think of for using Debian over RedHat > > from a sysadmin's point of view is that security fixes on Debian arrive > > very fast and are implemented into the distributions at once, keeping > > your

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread John L . Fjellstad
pgpjuoZ0G6L9J.pgp Description: PGP message

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread Will Trillich
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:41:59PM +0100, Jeff Green wrote: > I resent the implication that we sysadmins ever think at all! And that > even if we did we had brains with which to accomplish the task. > Jeff > ( A sysadmin) :) > Incidentally the best reason I can think of for using Debian over RedH

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread John Galt
dhh.gt.org> on 07-09-2000 10:02:21 AM > > Sent by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > cc: > Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat > > > Chris Gray writes: > > I understand that dpkg is a much easier

RE: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread John Galt
Yeah, but it's official recognition for a non-coding sysadmin: show me the Debian equivalent... On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, J.T. Wenting wrote: > > > > > > That makes RedHat seem like Windows. > > > > redhat is a Windows clone built with GNU/Linux technology. > > > always suspected as much... > They eve

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread Jeff Green
I resent the implication that we sysadmins ever think at all! And that even if we did we had brains with which to accomplish the task. Jeff ( A sysadmin) Incidentally the best reason I can think of for using Debian over RedHat from a sysadmin's point of view is that security fixes on Debian arrive

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread Harald Thingelstad
On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 19:05:32 Wayne Sitton wrote: > OK guys, I think you've gotten off the subject that I needed. Although > what you have given me is great, what I need now is kind of like stories > of thing that have happened to show why Debian would be better. Or, > even links to stories about

Re: Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread kmself
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 12:05:32PM -0500, Wayne Sitton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > OK guys, I think you've gotten off the subject that I needed. Although > what you have given me is great, what I need now is kind of like stories > of thing that have happened to show why Debian would be better.

Debian VS. Red Hat

2000-09-08 Thread Wayne Sitton
OK guys, I think you've gotten off the subject that I needed. Although what you have given me is great, what I need now is kind of like stories of thing that have happened to show why Debian would be better. Or, even links to stories about the benefits of Debian over Red Hat. Wayne

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-08 Thread Juli-Manel Merino Vidal
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 02:37:03PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Bruce Sass writes: > > I want to be able to manually add and edit entries in the DB (i.e., given > > the freedom to royally screw things up if I feel so inclined), and it > > doesn't matter if it is via a text editor or a special bin e

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-08 Thread Bruce Sass
On 7 Sep 2000, John Hasler wrote: > Bruce Sass writes: > > The result is still human readable and editable with any text editor, if > > you know the codes. The "special dpkg editor" would just make life > > easier for those not wanting to look up or learn any codes. > > Ok, but I'm not sure that

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-07 Thread John Hasler
Bruce Sass writes: > The result is still human readable and editable with any text editor, if > you know the codes. The "special dpkg editor" would just make life > easier for those not wanting to look up or learn any codes. Ok, but I'm not sure that it would be significantly faster then a well-d

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread Michael Soulier
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Juli-Manel Merino Vidal wrote: > Yes, but the binary database could be automatically compiled when > necessary, so main data is in the text one, but then it could be > compiled into the binary one. Look at sendmail configuration... this > is not done automatically, but it works

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread David Wright
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > If you chose an ASN.1 or equivalent data format you could edit it with the > tools from openssl.. I hate windows registry because the tool they made > to edit/correct it was an afterthought. Just because Doze screwed it up > doesn't mean that th

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-07 Thread Bruce Sass
On 7 Sep 2000, John Hasler wrote: > Bruce Sass writes: > > I want to be able to manually add and edit entries in the DB (i.e., given > > the freedom to royally screw things up if I feel so inclined), and it > > doesn't matter if it is via a text editor or a special bin editor. > > I'm not convince

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-07 Thread John Hasler
Bruce Sass writes: > I want to be able to manually add and edit entries in the DB (i.e., given > the freedom to royally screw things up if I feel so inclined), and it > doesn't matter if it is via a text editor or a special bin editor. I'm not convinced that you can write a special bin editor that

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-07 Thread Bruce Sass
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Ethan Benson wrote: <...> > text database is the ONLY way to go, if it were not for that i would > have been totally fscked when my /var got hosed and my backup was > inconsistent with my current package installation which confused > dpkg. (answer: emacs /var/lib/dpkg/status to

RE: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread Christian Pernegger
> -Original Message- > From: Nathan E Norman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Nathan E Norman > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 2:56 AM > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat > > You only need a shell to edit a text file. Yo

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread Juli-Manel Merino Vidal
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 10:06:58PM -0400, Michael Soulier wrote: > On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Nathan E Norman wrote: > > > You only need a shell to edit a text file. You also only need to read > > and understand pseudo-english. > > Not to mention the fact that text editors are a tad more common

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread Jason Quigley
Couldn't agree more! --On Wednesday, September 6, 2000 19:31 -0500 John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: David.Middleton writes: ...horse [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...crap... plonk<

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-07 Thread Ethan Benson
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 10:31:38AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] > > Still you have to admit if there was an inteligent way of moving from text > to binary format (like cron??) it would keep two camps happy for a while... [EMAIL PROTECTED] eb]$ time dlocate -s dlocate Package: dlocate St

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-07 Thread Ethan Benson
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:28:15PM +1100, loki wrote: > I thought Solaris used binary databases for speed, with a text one > as backup and for readability. What if we had both a text and > binary database, and added the following options to dpkg: [snip] no need install dlocate: $ time dlocate

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread David . Middleton
Once apon a time we were talking about things that were not 10 times more painful than using reg-edit I thought that was the line in the sand and we had agreed to not go below that... OK then, the least OS in the world, MSDOS 3.1 you could edit binary using debug so there And I bet there were

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread John Hasler
Nathan writes: > You only need a shell to edit a text file. Or _any_ text editor, including one running under a different OS on the same or a different machine (or a hex debugger or a disk editor, for that matter). -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Michael Soulier
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> You only need a shell to edit a text file. You also only need to read > >> and understand pseudo-english. > > > > Not to mention the fact that text editors are a tad more common > >and standard than say, a registry editor. > > > > Mike

Re: dpkg binary dbase (was Re: Debian vs. Red Hat)

2000-09-06 Thread loki
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 07:02:21PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Chris Gray writes: >> I understand that dpkg is a much easier tool to use. It is also a >> lot slower. It would be nice to write it with a binary database. > > _N_ > Ahhm. > Do you want to try to edi

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Michael Soulier
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Nathan E Norman wrote: > You only need a shell to edit a text file. You also only need to read > and understand pseudo-english. Not to mention the fact that text editors are a tad more common and standard than say, a registry editor. Mike

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Nathan E Norman
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 10:17:03AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > That argument is total horse [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Would you like to edit a text file without an editor??? > > Either way you need tools to do the work, this idea that you can't assemble > a binary file to be easy to human co

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread John Hasler
David.Middleton writes: > ...horse [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...crap... >plonk< -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread David . Middleton
At which point I would like to say I only use debian. I had to go back to windows because a particular TI development environment was "doze only" and within 15min I was bangin my head against a wall. I have been on linux since it came on 16 floppys, so anyone who wants to "You heretic" me can kis

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread David . Middleton
chael Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07-09-2000 10:06:18 AM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org cc: Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Chris Gray wrote: > Right. I understand that dpkg is a much easier tool to use. It is also > a lot slower. It would be nice to write

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread David . Middleton
esign. John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@dhh.gt.org> on 07-09-2000 10:02:21 AM Sent by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org cc: Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat Chris Gray writes: > I understand that dpkg is a much easier tool to use. It is also a lot >

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Michael Soulier
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Chris Gray wrote: > Right. I understand that dpkg is a much easier tool to use. It is also > a lot slower. It would be nice to write it with a binary database. > Maybe when I have extra time. Are you sure you want to use a binary database? One of my biggest complain

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread John Hasler
Chris Gray writes: > I understand that dpkg is a much easier tool to use. It is also a lot > slower. It would be nice to write it with a binary database. _N_ Ahhm. Do you want to try to edit a binary database to fix screwups? -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Chris Gray
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 02:01:18PM -0700, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:19:14AM -0400, Chris Gray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > > It is my experience most people feel whatever they are familiar with is > > > the > > > best for situation. I don't think I know *that*

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread kmself
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:19:14AM -0400, Chris Gray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Paul, > > > > > > It's to anyone, I've mainly used Debian, because of it's > > > stability, but our > > > ISP has a contractor who's opinion is "Red Hat's the best, > > > thats why they > > > are so popular." I

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Jürgen A. Erhard
> "Paul" == Paul McHale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi Paul, just adding my two cents, [...] Paul> There are curious parts of debian. Debian has a religious Paul> issues with /usr/local. Not so. Please go read up on the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, /usr/doc/debian-policy/f

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread J.H.M. Dassen \(Ray\)
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 02:44:23 -0400, Paul McHale wrote: > Debian has a religious issues with /usr/local. Some packages really want > to be there (I.e. apache). Huh? Check out what the policy manual says about it (http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch3.html#s3.1); essentially, the religiou

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Chris Gray
Paul, > > > It's to anyone, I've mainly used Debian, because of it's > > stability, but our > > ISP has a contractor who's opinion is "Red Hat's the best, > > thats why they > > are so popular." I want to dipute this, but I need more than just my own > > It is my experience most people feel

RE: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-06 Thread Paul McHale
Wayne, > It's to anyone, I've mainly used Debian, because of it's > stability, but our > ISP has a contractor who's opinion is "Red Hat's the best, > thats why they > are so popular." I want to dipute this, but I need more than just my own It is my experience most people feel whatever they ar

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread I. Tura
You can find more information by searching the mail archives using as search query the following: current Redhat user evaluates Debian that is the subject for the email that that man asked to Debian-User. It gave lots of interesting replies that you can add to the the pres

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread Michael Bacarella
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Sven Burgener wrote: > On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 08:04:19PM +0518, USM Bish wrote: > > MCSE ? In our part of the world that stands for "Must > > Consult a Second Expert" ! Does M$ have some other > > version of this acronym ? > > Yes, sure: "Minesweeper Consultant, Solitaire

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread Sven Burgener
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 08:04:19PM +0518, USM Bish wrote: > MCSE ? In our part of the world that stands for "Must > Consult a Second Expert" ! Does M$ have some other > version of this acronym ? Yes, sure: "Minesweeper Consultant, Solitaire Expert". :) Sven -- The UNIX Guru's view of sex: unz

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread kmself
Well, there *is* a woman I know who's entirely smitten by a Debian developer she met recently. Which I guess counts as sexier merchandising. And Alan Cox says we know where the good beer is . I'll just leave it at that. On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 01:20:26PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Sexier

Re: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread USM Bish
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 08:11:04AM +0200, J.T. Wenting wrote: > > > > > > That makes RedHat seem like Windows. > > > > redhat is a Windows clone built with GNU/Linux technology. > > > always suspected as much... > They even have a RedHat Certified Engineer program... MCSE for Linux, > anyone? >

RE: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread Alvin Oga
national ISP is A Debian Company! > > Wayne > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 10:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Debian vs. Red Hat > > > > Debian versions

RE: Debian vs. Red Hat

2000-09-05 Thread J.T. Wenting
> > > > That makes RedHat seem like Windows. > > redhat is a Windows clone built with GNU/Linux technology. > always suspected as much... They even have a RedHat Certified Engineer program... MCSE for Linux, anyone? Jeroen T. Wenting [EMAIL PROTECTED] Murphy was wrong, things that can't go wrong

  1   2   3   >