On 8/29/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
oh i completely understand. there are devices out there that just don't NEED to be up 110% of the time, but REQUIRE them to be. gentoo can be fitted to run on such mission critical scenario.
which is why never update a production server until you've tried it out on a testing server. it just makes good sense.
how many times in a year do you actually have to have new libstdc++ ? ;) or an updated gcc..? i wouldn't move a production machine to a new version of gcc until after its been tested out in non production situations. of course compiling would take a bit out of system resources... don't we all have those problems?
well if it had to be done... excluding of course x... which takes hours to compile you can have a box done in a hour maybe two.
some people expect support. some people provide them. no thing huge about it. we have different ways of doing things.
i know. to each his own way
we'll never get out of an argument of which distro is best... i find gentoo can be tailored to meet my demands at my own pace. some people find suse or redhat. i find gentoo is an acquired taste that you have to try it to love it.
anyway we'll never get over this so... to each his own. :)
cheers.
Tell this to someone who's actually making a living deploying
solutions that are as fool-proof and fail-safe as possible. ;) Living
on the edge is alright if you have the luxury of failure -- in other
circumstances, the option of failure is just a bit too painful to
swallow (think, nuclear reactor computers).
oh i completely understand. there are devices out there that just don't NEED to be up 110% of the time, but REQUIRE them to be. gentoo can be fitted to run on such mission critical scenario.
Although we're not building solutions to those scales (yet ;) ) I'd
certainly like to be assured that the solution will not fail because
an upgrade in a system library that's not being used by the solution
I'm building caused the whole platform to break. Or even perhaps when
the service is already required, that the system isn't available
because it's being DoS'ed by the compiler.
which is why never update a production server until you've tried it out on a testing server. it just makes good sense.
> > But maybe if I had all the time in the world in between updates and
>
>
> not really. gentoo updates almost every 24 hours. all you need is to emerge,
> you could probably set cron to do the job for you but i'd advice against
> it... updating has its dangers and you can say about that with every distro
> and every piece of software.
>
Check that: when you update, you (re)compile. If you're updating a
considerably large library (libstdc++, libc) or application (gcc) then
that takes time. Compilation requires a lot of resources (memory,
processor, disk) which could better be used to serve the actual
solution's purpose than "upgrading a library".
how many times in a year do you actually have to have new libstdc++ ? ;) or an updated gcc..? i wouldn't move a production machine to a new version of gcc until after its been tested out in non production situations. of course compiling would take a bit out of system resources... don't we all have those problems?
> > the client can wait a few days to get the system *set-up*, then maybe
>
>
> it would really depend on the situation. it takes about a day to get a box
> running to full spec, depending really on what kind of packages you select.
> optimization over general specs? or a myriad other consideration.
>
Whatever happened to "install base system, install required packages,
harden, then deploy" in half a day or even less?
well if it had to be done... excluding of course x... which takes hours to compile you can have a box done in a hour maybe two.
When you say "it is our way", what exactly do you mean by that?
some people expect support. some people provide them. no thing huge about it. we have different ways of doing things.
Not everyone is a Linux guru/expert nor is everyone willing to bear
the fact that you need to recompile everything because something
changed.
i know. to each his own way
But do you really need a formula 1 race car when what you need is to
be sure that your car won't conk out on you in various road and
weather conditions?
I see Gentoo as a novelty distribution. It just wants to be different,
so it's different -- no particular reasoning behind it really. Just
like SuSE, RHEL, and Debian, they're all different from each other
(and there isn't really any reason why they shouldn't or should be
different from each other). Now if you like that everything is "tuned
to perfection" at the risk of easy breakage, then go ahead and trust
your mission critical application to Gentoo. Let me know how you do
after a few load tests, hardware failures, and software upgrades. ;)
we'll never get out of an argument of which distro is best... i find gentoo can be tailored to meet my demands at my own pace. some people find suse or redhat. i find gentoo is an acquired taste that you have to try it to love it.
anyway we'll never get over this so... to each his own. :)
cheers.
--
Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife — chopping off what's incomplete and saying: "Now it's complete because it's ended here." from Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib by the Princess Irulan
blog (politics): http://arkangel1a.blogspot.com/
blog (tech): http://penguinstuff.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
