> >
> > You'll have to patch ssh if you want to do that ... simple enough to do
> > by hand, but nonetheless one more irritating niggly. (patched for
> > glibc2.1 / RH6.0, that is)
> >
> > I would be happy to document the patch I used if enough people plan to
> > use RH6.0 + ssh.
> >
>
> I'll a
Steffen Dettmer a écrit :
> but I assume that
> RH includes at least a ssh, aint?
I don't think so as ssh is probably subject to u.s. export restrictions.
Fathi Ben Nasr.
__
OpenSSL Project
On Wed, 12 May 1999, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
> Does this mean that RH comes without ssh ?! OK, I compiled it myself
> always (the thing with the lastest stable version ;) ), but I assume that
> RH includes at least a ssh, aint?
American law has ridiculous export restrictions which could prohibit
Thornton Prime wrote:
> Steffen Dettmer wrote:
> >
> > > just to say that for me, Suse 6.0 (or 5.3) is pretty nice, easy to install, no
> > > broken packages.
> >
> > YES. :)
> >
> > The onliest bug I've found is that a raid level 1 (Mirror) device won't be
> > re-sync automatically (patch aviabl
> The first thing I do to a RedHat box if it's going to be a webserver,
> for example, is rip out all the apache-related RPMs and rebuild apache
> in /opt/www (usually we have a fast SCSI disk mounted on /opt). Then we
> compile ssh, add a JDK, fix /etc, and lock down the ports.
Does this mean t
Steffen Dettmer wrote:
>
> > just to say that for me, Suse 6.0 (or 5.3) is pretty nice, easy to install, no
> > broken packages.
>
> YES. :)
>
> The onliest bug I've found is that a raid level 1 (Mirror) device won't be
> re-sync automatically (patch aviable ;) ). RH 5.3 does not have this bug.
On Wed, 12 May 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
> > Great! So what is it that is actually good about Linux, then? And RH in
> > particular? I find this all a bit peculiar coming from a background
> > where the answer to "which version?" is invariably "the latest stable
> >
I'm not the moderator, and I'm not sure how many others I'd
be speaking for if I asked you to kindly take this discussion
elsewhere... perhaps somewhere more appropriate (imagine that..)
Kindly consider doing so. Thank you,
"Carlo M. Arenas Belon" wrote:
/*
* > Erwann ABALEA wrote:
Ben Laurie wrote:
> Great! So what is it that is actually good about Linux, then? And RH in
> particular? I find this all a bit peculiar coming from a background
> where the answer to "which version?" is invariably "the latest stable
> one, of course".
Lots of people is trying to get out of MS
> But, I'm having my usual
> nightmare ... so are there any Linux gurus other there willing to help
> get the damn thing installed? I'm trying to do RH 6.0,
OH GOD NO! NOT A .0 VERSION!
Perhaps you would like the 5.2 release better, seeing as to how it is
not RAGINGLY UNSTABLE... I am far from
10 matches
Mail list logo
