On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Balachandran Sivakumar
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Arun,
>
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Arun Khan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Girish Venkatachalam  wrote:
>>> I agree with Marc(what is surprising here?). Long ago I installed Redhat
>>> and was shocked to find that  there was no make in the default install.
>>
>> Why do you need 'make' in the default install when there are pre-built
>> RPM package files for everything that Redhat provides in it's distro?
>>
>
>         It may not be for what ever is already in the distro's
> repositories. What if I write a simple C application, with the source
> code over 3-4 files ? I would use make. I guess it is alright to
> expect make in the default install. Thanks
>

To the best of my knowledge and the deployments I have seen, RHEL is
meant for server setups.  Thus, the development tools may not be part
of the "default" installations.   That is the USP Redhat has built up
for RHEL.

If I had to build something then I would do it in a "development"
machine.   To have a "development" machine, during the "install"
process, I would choose the "Development" package group and voila I
would have all the necessary tools to build my apps.   I would then
test it on a pre-production system before deploying it on the
production server.

I would not give the developer a "production" machine to develop and
test his/her code.   I think the OP needs to understand the different
philosophies of the various distros  and select the one that meets his
requirements.  In this case he probably missed the screen where he
could do package selections during install time; really it only adds a
few extra minutes to the install process.

openBSD has only one flavor and perhaps it installs every thing
including the kitchen sink to cater to *all* the needs of it's user
base and that sets up a different set of expectations when those users
move to Linux.

The same would apply to Linux folks trying *BSD.  I have a couple of
FreeBSD setups and there are differences in the way it is administered
v/s a Linux distro.  It would be comparing apples to oranges to say
the default FreeBSD install lacks blah blah vis-a-vis some Linux
distro.

-- Arun Khan
_______________________________________________
ILUGC Mailing List:
http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc

Reply via email to