Hiya,
> Why don't you just wait for the release notes, when it's actually released.
> Or sign up for RHN and get it a week early.
>
Well, the release notes should not be that different than the release
notes from the beta. The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
longer serves the pur
This one time, at band camp,
Eric Burke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, the release notes should not be that different than the release
> notes from the beta. The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
> longer serves the purpose.
We admin a network with approx 600 workstations and I f
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 00:28:52 at 12:28:52AM -0800, Eric Burke ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
>
> The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
> longer serves the purpose. Once compatibility is broken by adding
> something no one else is doing, all else is out the window. Sorry, but
> the whole N
Eric Burke wrote:
Sorry, but
the whole NPTL gains nothing...no speed...nothing.No other Linux distro
is using it or planning on it. That in itself breaks compatibility and
the products usefulness.
What makes you think other distro's won't use it? It's in glibc, and
AFAIK, the changes have been ac
Hello everyone
I have been searching for days to figure out what I am doing wrong.
I would like to get postfix working with smtp auth on my redhat 8 server.
I'm using postfix 2.0.7 and cyrus-sasl 2.1.10 (all required libs
installed:
login, cram-md5, digest-md5, ...).
As soon as I enable smtp aut
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:28:52AM -0800, Eric Burke wrote:
> The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
> longer serves the purpose.
The bottom line is that RH9 is not targetted for the corporate desktop.
That's what Red Hat Linux Enterprise AW is for. If you're trying to use
a product t
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 08:06:55PM +1100, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> We admin a network with approx 600 workstations and I feel redhat may not
> be the solution for this purpose also.
Red Hat Linux 9 is not targetted for you. That's what Enterprise Linux
AW is for.
> The cost of upgrades is way ab
Hi,
I have recently installed a ASUS P4PE mb.
I use a fully updated RH8.0 (0!!)
Neither for OSS nor for Alsa can I find a driver.
Can anybody point me to the light?
Henk
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
i have an (alleged) JFFS2 format file that i would like
to mount (via -o loop) and examine on my RH box, so i'm
trying to build in JFFS2 filesystem support.
i've taken a stock 2.4.18-14 kernel, added core MTD
support, which then allowed me to select JFFS2 support
from the filesystems menu, wh
On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 17:52, Guy Fraser wrote:
> That is why the company I work for has migrated all but two RH servers
> to FreeBSD.
[..]
> Moving to FreeBSD has been an improvement over OSF/1,True64, Solaris,
> SCO, BSDI and all other Linux Platforms.
Free|Net|OpenBSD are all great op
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 04:06, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> We admin a network with approx 600 workstations and I feel redhat may not
> be the solution for this purpose also. The cost of upgrades is way above
> that of Microsoft, who do updates for free. But I would not be going with
> a MS solution but
Brent Fox wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 18:29, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
You cannot expect a
company or joe user to upgrade their operating system every year
(which is now necessary given the 12 month limit on bug/security
fixes).
You also cannot expect Red Hat to provide errata forever on a
On Saturday 29 March 2003 01:45, M. Fioretti uttered:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 00:28:52 at 12:28:52AM -0800, Eric Burke
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
> > longer serves the purpose. Once compatibility is broken by adding
> > something no one else is
Brent Fox wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 16:36, Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at band camp,
Brent Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...snip...
By the "products that customers pay more for", I mean the Enterprise
line.
We won't release errata or updates for 7.3 after the End Of Life
On Saturday 29 March 2003 00:28, Eric Burke uttered:
> Well, the release notes should not be that different than the release
> notes from the beta. The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
> longer serves the purpose. Once compatibility is broken by adding
> something no one else is doing,
On Saturday 29 March 2003 09:08, Guy Fraser uttered:
> Sounds reasonable if I can get the SRPMS using a regular entitlement.
You can get them for absolutely nothing.
ftp://updates.redhat.com/enterprise/2.1AS/en/os/SRPMS
Unless you had to pay $$ for your FTP client (which I doubt) or you count th
If all your documents are in your home directory and it is on a seperate
partition like I have, the full install is the way I would go.
I do a custom install, so that I can determine what gets installed and
make sure my "home partition" does not get formatted.
Cédric Chausson wrote:
Hello all,
Gerald Henriksen wrote:
On 27 Mar 2003 21:58:29 -0800, you wrote:
Would I be able to get around this (wine not working) if I built from source?
No. The problem is that the current versions of wine and some other
apps will not work with the new thread system that is in glibc 2.3
Until t
On Saturday 29 March 2003 09:38, Guy Fraser uttered:
> I wonder how many companies are like mine, where the people with Linux
> Desktops are SOL and I was the person who convinced the powers that be,
> it would be a productivity improvement. Now non of the people with linux
> can access our custome
Thank you very much.
You may have saved my job.
This version even works better that the one RH had.
Frank Jahn wrote:
Uninstall the RH wine packages and then install the wine-20030318-1rh8winehq
packages from http://sourceforge.net and it will work.
Frank
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[
Joe Klemmer wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 18:27, Guy Fraser wrote:
You must be talking about home users without any important data.
Many servers and workstations run until they can not be feasibly
maintained, or there is a compelling reason to upgrade.
Well, since we are discussing RH's Perso
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:00:24PM -0600, Charles wrote:
>
> There are folk in the local linux user group that assert that RH
> simply cannot be made secure.
>
> I would really appreciate a little enlightenment on this.
Enlightenment: Those people are card-carrying idiots. Don't trust
anything
OK, RedHat will try to resolve the many flaws in RH8 with their new
release, RH9 on April 7th.
Any idea what they will charge retail for this?
(I also paid for my RH8 release, though considering the hundreds of
wasted hours trying to get it to do what it promised to do I feel as
though I am due
> The feeble excuses from the guy's who appear to work for Red Hat just
> doesn't cut the mustard when my job is on the line because they messed
> around with somthing that should not have been messed with.
Had to pull RH8 from my work machine and regress to M$ because it was so
buggy. Imagine
Colburn writes
>
> OK, RedHat will try to resolve the many flaws in RH8 with their new
> release, RH9 on April 7th.
>
> Any idea what they will charge retail for this?
>
> (I also paid for my RH8 release, though considering the hundreds of
> wasted hours trying to get it to do what it prom
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 01:24:29PM -0500, Colburn wrote:
> OK, RedHat will try to resolve the many flaws in RH8 with their new
> release, RH9 on April 7th.
>
> Any idea what they will charge retail for this?
Red Hat Linux 9 has not yet been announced. It will be announced on
Monday, and not to
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:00:24PM -0600, Charles wrote:
> I realize I am coming in a bit late, but would someone please expain
> *exactly why* RH should not be run on the enterprise?
No on can because the statement is false.
> There are folk in the local linux user group that assert that RH
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:53:42AM -0700, Guy Fraser wrote:
> What about the extra US$60/year for the entitlement, US$60/year x 500 =
> US$30,000. For each 500 entitlements, a persons salary can be paid for a
> year.
You're obviously not a business person. I would expect that a good
percentage
Eric Burke wrote:
Hiya,
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:36:16AM +, Brian Johnson wrote:
Could someone point me to a reference on what has changed for the
new version?
It's not yet available. Wait until the announcement on April 7 and the
release notes will be publicly available, and you can get
Because there market share seems to be more important to them than their
long time supporters.
Doug B wrote:
If I understand correctly, it seems the reason to jump a major version
is because the new glibc breaks binary compatability.
OK... that makes sense.
Why then would RedHat introduce a new
Edward S. Marshall wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:01:09AM -0500, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
Do you know for sure that it breaks things? I'm about to install
it today ...
I can verify some PHP breakage (phpwiki's use of gdbm seems to do a number
on the glibc upgrade, while other dba_XX(
Hiya,
>
> Perhaps everybody just needs a big foam clue bat attack on the differences
> between "Free as in speech" and "Free as in beer".
I snipped most as i agree with most. I like the statement of the clue
bat as well, and will use it back ;)
I have paid for boxed sets since 5.2, as I do app
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Colburn wrote:
> OK, RedHat will try to resolve the many flaws in RH8 with their new
> release, RH9 on April 7th.
>
> Any idea what they will charge retail for this?
Amazon will sell it to you for 31.49 GBP
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B8Y8KL
or 36.99 dollars
I don't know if you can trust security updates any more. The last glibc
security update almost made
me loose my job because it wrecked software that was required by our
support staff to do their jobs.
Ed Wilts wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 01:45:35PM -0500, Allan M. Stewart wrote:
I'm worki
> I think you're mistaken here. Release notes for 8.0 were different than that
> of the last beta before it, same with juts about every beta -> full release
> I've ever seen.
>
I have been wrong before and will be again. I hope I am wrong here :)
> --
> Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE
> http://geek
At 02:21 PM 3/24/2003 -0600, you wrote:
Please note that 8.0 will be unsupported after December 31 of this year.
You should start planning a version 9 rollout soon [...]
Wait... how come 6.2 was supported for security errata and such until
recently, and 8.0 will become unsupported less than 9 mont
They already have it in RH 8, wrecking applications in it's wake but
still it's there already.
Markku Kolkka wrote:
Viestissä Maanantai 24. Maaliskuuta 2003 22:44, Daevid Vincent kirjoitti:
Well, I do know that it's incredibly arrogant and misleading to jump from
v8.0 to v9.0 without any inte
Now that is just moronic. Just becuase one company is a bad corporate
citizen, does not give all corporate citizens the right to act badly.
Keith Winston wrote:
...snip...
Microsoft plays the same games with certs and trys to force both their
certified engineers and customers on the upgrade tr
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:32:19PM -0700, Guy Fraser wrote:
> RH is up to it again!
>
> ...
> The following packages have been deprecated, and may be removed from a
> future release of Red Hat Linux:
>
> - pine - License-related issues
> ...
> - lilo - Grub is the recommended bootloader
>
> I ab
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 11:42, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
>
> Wait... how come 6.2 was supported for security errata and such until
> recently, and 8.0 will become unsupported less than 9 months after the next
> version comes out? This doesn't make sense to me; are you sure it's correct?
>
Thta was
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:39:47PM -0700, Guy Fraser wrote:
> I don't know if you can trust security updates any more. The last glibc
> security update almost made
> me loose my job because it wrecked software that was required by our
> support staff to do their jobs.
If you're running non-Red H
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 01:42:24PM -0600, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> At 02:21 PM 3/24/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >Please note that 8.0 will be unsupported after December 31 of this year.
> >You should start planning a version 9 rollout soon [...]
>
> Wait... how come 6.2 was supported for security err
Randall J. Parr wrote:
Thanks for this reference. We can only hope for changes that address
this. I have long been a Red Hat support and have proven it by
spending my time and money for their certification. I must say I am
starting to feel a bit jerked around.
Me too, this glibc thing of lat
Now that is total M$ crap! Pay me huge bucks and maybe I will support
the comunity that put me where I am.
Gerald Henriksen wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:56:17 -0800, you wrote:
Yes, I was aware of that BUT please understand, the change to rapid
expiration of specific versions means we have
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:17:36 -0800, you wrote:
>Of course, I would note that "RH" is much more than the GPL Red Hat Linux
>product. I don't see NPTL going into RHEL, so that is still _very_ much
>viable for a corporate desktop. What I see is a lot of people that were
Ironically enough Red Ha
On Saturday 29 March 2003 11:32, Guy Fraser uttered:
> The following packages have been deprecated, and may be removed from a
> future release of Red Hat Linux:
>
> - pine - License-related issues
> ...
> - lilo - Grub is the recommended bootloader
>
> I absolutely hate grub! Now this sucks big tim
Ed Wilts wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:00:24PM -0600, Charles wrote:
I realize I am coming in a bit late, but would someone please expain
*exactly why* RH should not be run on the enterprise?
No on can because the statement is false.
There are folk in the local linux user group that as
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 07:34:40 -0600, you wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:28:52AM -0800, Eric Burke wrote:
>> The bottom line is for a corporate desktop, RH no
>> longer serves the purpose.
>
>The bottom line is that RH9 is not targetted for the corporate desktop.
>That's what Red Hat Linux Ente
Marcie Laux wrote:
Message: 13
Subject: Re: Red Hat 9
From: Joe Klemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Mar 2003 22:17:54 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2003-03-25 at 18:29, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
> While I agree some of the decisions Red Hat has made have been
>
On Saturday 29 March 2003 12:06, Gerald Henriksen uttered:
> The Red Hat sales dept. disagrees with you.
>
> Red Hat sales has stated that Red Hat 9 is enough for the corporate
> desktop and that RHEL WS is meant for more technical users. See
> https://listman.redhat.com/pipermail/phoebe-list/2003-
On Saturday 29 March 2003 12:08, Guy Fraser uttered:
> Well, well, well. There you go, another pseudo system administrator. I
> have been supporting multiple unix platforms since 1984, and RH since
> 1995. The issues coming up now should be very relevant to RH. If I had
> to go to my boss and tell
Marie-Thérèse Lorentzen wrote:
...snip...
Well, I do know that it's incredibly arrogant and misleading to jump from
v8.0 to v9.0 without any intermediate steps. NOBODY in the software world
does that without some serious serious feature additions. RH9 will be
nothing more than some normal updat
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:59:22 -0800, you wrote:
>Jumping the gun on RH9 was a smart move.
>
>They can EOL 7.x and of course nobody is gonna load 9.x on production
>boxes which means they only have to support 8.x.
>
>Not a bad idea at all.
Except for the fact that both 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and 8.0 have s
Ronald W. Heiby wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've noticed what may be a related problem. This has existed in the
7.x series, and I just replicated it under 8.0 (with all updates).
My linux box has ext2 filesystems and fat32 filesystems. I have some
of each shared via Samba.
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Jesse Keating wrote:
>On Saturday 29 March 2003 11:32, Guy Fraser uttered:
>> The following packages have been deprecated, and may be removed from a
>> future release of Red Hat Linux:
>> - pine - License-related issues
>> ...
>> - lilo - Grub is the recommended bootloader
>>
OK then Ed and Jessey.
What target is RH targetted for?
If it isn't sutable for a corporate desktop and it doesn't support off
the shelf software that home users want where does it belong?
By the way, I can read and know the difference between depeciated and
removed. Usualy when somthing is de
Hmm, I am pretty sure wine was included with RH 8.0.
Ed Wilts wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:39:47PM -0700, Guy Fraser wrote:
I don't know if you can trust security updates any more. The last glibc
security update almost made
me loose my job because it wrecked software that was required by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 29 March 2003 04:32 pm, Guy Fraser wrote:
> Hmm, I am pretty sure wine was included with RH 8.0.
>
Yes it was although I'm still trying to figure out how to get it
working! :-)
Mike W
> Ed Wilts wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:39:47
On Saturday 29 March 2003 13:26, Oisin C. Feeley uttered:
> Just out of interest, what is it that LILO can do that GRUB cannot at
> present? I've enjoyed the switch from LILO to GRUB, but I only use it
> for relatively simple things.
There are certian dualboot situations that grub can't handle I'
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:50:18 -0600, you wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:39:47PM -0700, Guy Fraser wrote:
>> I don't know if you can trust security updates any more. The last glibc
>> security update almost made
>> me loose my job because it wrecked software that was required by our
>> support
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Saturday 29 March 2003 12:08, Guy Fraser uttered:
Well, well, well. There you go, another pseudo system administrator. I
have been supporting multiple unix platforms since 1984, and RH since
1995. The issues coming up now should be very relevant to RH. If I had
to go to
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Saturday 29 March 2003 09:38, Guy Fraser uttered:
I wonder how many companies are like mine, where the people with Linux
Desktops are SOL and I was the person who convinced the powers that be,
it would be a productivity improvement. Now non of the people with linux
can a
Viestissä Lauantai 29. Maaliskuuta 2003 05:37, Jesse Keating kirjoitti:
> Does anybody know of a (non-promise) SATA controller that will work in
> Linux?
The Silicon Image SiI 3112 chip is supported, but it's normally integrated on
motherboard instead of an add-on card.
--
Markku Kolkk
I hear you.
I'll probably find out Monday if we will have to switch to something
else, but I am fairly confident we will not be moving away from RH on
all machines in the near future, unless it may be running under VMWare
on another platform for testing purposes only.
Colburn wrote:
The feebl
> To that extent, yes, 9 is ok for the receptionist's desk, or the sales
guy, or
> pretty much anybody that just uses it for a web/email/office kiosk. For
> developers, or engineers or those such, then the RHEL is a better choice.
The receptionists, sales, and other administrative functions are
This one time, at band camp,
Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Myth. Did you upgrade from NT4 to Win2K for free? How about from 2K to
> XP? Lucky you - they gave you that for free too?
So, updates from one Enterprise release to the next will be free?
>
> Did you get your office suite f
Oisin C. Feeley wrote:
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Saturday 29 March 2003 11:32, Guy Fraser uttered:
The following packages have been deprecated, and may be removed from a
future release of Red Hat Linux:
- pine - License-related issues
...
- lilo - Grub is the recommended
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Snipped...
I've been staying pretty much out of this, but let me put my $0.02 in on
this issue from a support perspective. I, like Guy, have been pushing
my company to start using RH. I work for a multi billion $ (yes,
that's right) company and I
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 09:54:38AM +1000, Kevin Waterson wrote:
> This one time, at band camp,
> Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Myth. Did you upgrade from NT4 to Win2K for free? How about from 2K to
> > XP? Lucky you - they gave you that for free too?
> So, updates from one Enterpri
At 04:05 PM 3/25/2003 -0900, you wrote:
After 12 months, up2date goes away if you don't use enterprise.
Please provide evidence that this is true, as it does not match my reading
of the available literature. A URL will suffice.
--
Rodolfo J. Paiz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Psyche-list mailing list
[E
Download the current RPM from SourceForge. Then remove wine as root:
rpm -e wine
Next install wine as root:
rpm -i /path/to/downloaded/wine...
Then run your app just like you used to.
If you have never been able to get wine to install any software, then
you probably need to add your self to g
I will have much homework to do on this issue.
I still have a radius server running 4.2, has not missed a beat in
years, Dual P133 SPC machine
Kind regards
Kevin
Yikes! Have you run any security scans against it lately?
I have just built a new Radius server on FreeBSD and it works great.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 29 March 2003 06:55 pm, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> At 04:05 PM 3/25/2003 -0900, you wrote:
> >After 12 months, up2date goes away if you don't use enterprise.
>
> Please provide evidence that this is true, as it does not match my
> reading of
Mike Watson wrote:
I would NEVER use up2date directly from RH!
That is wise, for a highly critical server. The same goes for automatic
updates for Windows directly from Microsoft. The rough figures I have
from my own experience is that about 20-25% of service packs or hot
fixes from MS break s
You might want to try this free security test:
http://www.interactnetworks.com/freeoffer-trial.php
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Guy Fraser
> Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 4:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: RH 9 - new
** Reply to message from Guy Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:01:57
-0700
> Download the current RPM from SourceForge. Then remove wine as root:
>
> rpm -e wine
>
> Next install wine as root:
>
> rpm -i /path/to/downloaded/wine...
>
> Then run your app just like you used to.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 29 March 2003 06:01 pm, Guy Fraser wrote:
> Download the current RPM from SourceForge. Then remove wine as root:
>
> rpm -e wine
>
> Next install wine as root:
>
> rpm -i /path/to/downloaded/wine...
>
> Then run your app just like you used
On Saturday 29 March 2003 15:55, Mike Watson uttered:
> I tried to negotiate with RH to bring the RHN servers inside our
> company, but RH wouldn't do it. I will never allow anything---new
> software or upgrade---to be installed on my systems without my own QA
> folks testing it in my testbed with
On Saturday 29 March 2003 15:11, Guy Fraser uttered:
> Like I said above RH rolled the software out, and I am not responcible
> for updating the technicians workstations. But with the recent changes
> at RH the company has reluctantly purchased some entilements at my
> request. Having given my comp
On Saturday 29 March 2003 15:54, Guy Fraser uttered:
> I don't know about the licence issues RH claims to be at issue. It
> probably has somthing to do with the RHEL licensing, that conflicts with
> GPL or something like that, but that is just a guess. Other linux and
> BSD distributions don't seem
I have 3 RH 8 systems on paid basic entitlements. That works real nice for
standard up2date updates. However, sometimes I need something that is not
provided by up2date. E.g., I wanted to download the rawhide version of
logwatch since it reportedly fixed some problems in the version in the RH 8
dis
On Saturday 29 March 2003 17:43, Mike Vanecek uttered:
> I have 3 RH 8 systems on paid basic entitlements. That works real nice for
> standard up2date updates. However, sometimes I need something that is not
> provided by up2date. E.g., I wanted to download the rawhide version of
> logwatch since i
Guy Fraser wrote:
I don't know about the licence issues RH claims to be at issue. It
probably has somthing to do with the RHEL licensing, that conflicts with
GPL or something like that, but that is just a guess. Other linux and
BSD distributions don't seem to have a problem.
The Pine license doe
At 12:00 PM 3/29/2003 -0600, you wrote:
There are folk in the local linux user group that assert that RH simply
cannot be made secure.
I would really appreciate a little enlightenment on this.
There are folks (still!) who assert the world is flat and simply cannot be
made round.
There are folks
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 11:53, Guy Fraser wrote:
> What about the extra US$60/year for the entitlement, US$60/year x 500 =
> US$30,000. For each 500 entitlements, a persons salary can be paid for a
> year.
You have many other options for this. One that we are using at work is
to setup cu
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 12:17, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Perhaps everybody just needs a big foam clue bat attack on the differences
> between "Free as in speech" and "Free as in beer".
Amen brother! In fact I would offer that some need a genuine
Louisville Slugger.
--
Farewell neighbor. T
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 12:38, Guy Fraser wrote:
> While I am sending this message I am downloading versions of FreeBSD,
> SUSE and Debian. I am under the gun and I hope the people at RH who made
> this major up are as well. I would like to bet I am not the only
> person who's job is on the
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 13:00, Charles wrote:
> I realize I am coming in a bit late, but would someone please expain
> *exactly why* RH should not be run on the enterprise?
The point is that it can.
> There are folk in the local linux user group that assert that RH
> simply cannot be ma
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:32, Guy Fraser wrote:
> The following packages have been deprecated, and may be removed from a
> future release of Red Hat Linux:
>
> - pine - License-related issues
This has been something that's been widely known for a LONG time. And,
for reasons that i can no
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:29, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Perhaps the bigger issue here is, why did you roll out a glibc upgrade w/out
> testing it first?
I saw you asked him this already but no answer yet. I can't help but
wonder what Guy was doing 18 of the 19 years he's been a unix sysadmi
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:24, Guy Fraser wrote:
> Marie-Thérèse Lorentzen wrote:
>
[...]
> >--
> >Farewell neighbor. Thank you for giving us a safe place for so many
> >years.
> > Fred Rodgers - 1928-2003
Why do you quote my posts and attribute them to others? This is not
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:24, Guy Fraser wrote:
> >>Well, I do know that it's incredibly arrogant and misleading to jump from
> >>v8.0 to v9.0 without any intermediate steps. NOBODY in the software world
> >>does that without some serious serious feature additions. RH9 will be
> >>nothing more than
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 18:11, Guy Fraser wrote:
> I trusted RH not to cause such a huge problem. I personaly do not do the
> upgrades, but it was through my encouragement that RH was installed to
> reduce overhead costs, when everyone who had upgraded glibc and things
> broke it was put on me to
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 18:55, Mike Watson wrote:
> I've been staying pretty much out of this, but let me put my $0.02 in on
> this issue from a support perspective. I, like Guy, have been pushing
> my company to start using RH. I work for a multi billion $ (yes,
> that's right) company and I'm
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 19:40, Keith Winston wrote:
> The way I've been updating my servers lately is with a nice program
> called yum. Check it out here:
>
> http://www.linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/
Hey, that's Seth's util. I have also found current to be a good
alternative.
--
Farew
On 29 Mar 2003 22:42:15 -0500, you wrote:
>On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:24, Guy Fraser wrote:
>
>
>> Marie-Thérèse Lorentzen wrote:
>>
>[...]
>> >--
>> >Farewell neighbor. Thank you for giving us a safe place for so many
>> >years.
>> >Fred Rodgers - 1928-2003
>
> Why do you quot
At 04:31 PM 3/29/2003 -0700, you wrote:
The issue is resolved now, but it will take Management time to cool down.
I have written a memo to Management and the techs with RH explaining the
problem. And have suggested that all updates are verified on one machine
before they will be allowed on any o
At 04:54 PM 3/29/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Other than the change for changes sake, I can't see a reason for it. I am
used to lilo and have had more problems with grub than lilo has ever given
me. Besides I could not see how grub was better than lilo with out having
to research the configuration and
At 07:33 PM 3/29/2003 -0500, you wrote:
On Saturday 29 March 2003 06:55 pm, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> At 04:05 PM 3/25/2003 -0900, you wrote:
> >After 12 months, up2date goes away if you don't use enterprise.
>
> Please provide evidence that this is true, as it does not match my
> reading of the ava
On 22:01 28 Mar 2003, Ronald W. Heiby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Since sharing my home directory using NFS / automount, I sometimes
| find the following message on the X Window screen before Gnome gets
| going.
| "Your preferences files are currently in use. (If you are logged in to
| this same a
100 matches
Mail list logo
