Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
quote who=Alex Samad Can people comment on the differences between the two. Both the lay out of the file system and the its package manager. File system: Recent versions of Red Hat and Debian are much the same, as they comply with the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard http://www.pathname.com/fhs/. SuSE is fairly different (/opt/gnome and such, which I find odd), and I'm not sure how quickly they're FHS'ing their distribution. Debian's policy requires that configuration files be in /etc, and suggests to maintainers that you should consider creating a subdirectory of /etc named after your package. This means that different packages have an element of familiarity under Debian that they may not elsewhere. An example: Red Hat keeps Apache configuration in /etc/httpd/conf/ whilst Debian keeps it in /etc/apache/. I like that, especially when all my other software works the same way. Package management: It's all the same. Don't let anyone tell you differently. :-) And don't let anyone tell you that apt is better than rpm. They do completely different things! In Red Hat, you have rpm to manage your packages. Debian's equivalent is dpkg. They do very similar things in very similar ways, but the package format (and ideal behind the packages) is different. Being stuck with dpkg is as bad as being stuck with rpm - we have far more modern tools to use these days. In Debian, you have apt-get to install and update packages, whilst resolving their dependencies. In Red Hat, you have the Red Hat Network, apt-rpm, and a number of other tools that do this. apt-rpm (with a good upstream server) is very nice. [ There are also a number of other apt related utilities on Debian, such as apt-cdrom which lets you install packages from CD in a standard manner, apt-zip which lets you upgrade machines without network connections simply via cdrom, zip disks, etc. apt-listchanges that gives you a list of the changes in each package that you're upgrading, apt-move that lets you create a mirror from existing packages and rsyncs other mirrors, and so on. *Great* tools. ] RPMs are meant to install non-interactively, so they don't prompt you for information or tell you anything as you're installing them. They just get the binaries onto the disk, and let you get on with things. Debian has a very useful system called Debconf that asks you questions and pops up information about the packages in a standard manner as you're installing them. For example, when installing ssh on Debian, it reminds you about the ssh 1 - 2 change, asks you if you want to run the ssh server and whether it should be suid root or not (whilst telling you what that entails). Postfix and exim give you an opportunity to configure them for common setups. Useful stuff. This is great for almost every time except installation. Red Hat just smacks the packages on the drive and goes away, Debian prompts you for lots of different settings and notices. [ There are ways of getting around that, though. ] Also, Debian packages tend to do a lot of work for you. For instance, Apache will set up dso modules nicely, and used to do a funky log rotation scheme that rotated every log that apache wrote to, but this has been replaced with logrotate for standardisation reasons. PHP modules ask to enable themselves in the configuration, etc. Debian packages tend to be maintained lovingly by people who use and enjoy the software (and who are often enough anal retentive system administrators who want it to work absolutely perfectly all the time), rather than employees who have to package many pieces of software each. It's an efficiency thing, and a love thing. :-) Are there things that I can get for Debian that I can't for Redhat or vis versa. Availability of software: Debian has a very large, distributed development community. This means that a *lot* of software is part of the official distribution. It also means that you have a huge amount of variety - there are lots of packages for specific niches, hardware or languages due to the diversity of the developers. I haven't used Freshmeat much since I installed Debian, because I can generally use local tools on my hard drive to sort and search through much of the available Free Software out there. That said, Debian isn't generally supported directly by independent software vendors such as Oracle, IBM, etc. That is changing, but you may find it harder in the short term. SuSE and Red Hat enjoy good support from many ISVs. Please note I usually try to download source packages and compile and install and use the rpm for convenience I only ever do that for software that I work on, or need specific fixes that aren't available in the current version distributed with my OS. I think you'll find yourself doing that less often on Debian, where the administrative burden of package
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
I've answered this question before but I signed over my copyright to one Kerry Packer, so I'll write it again... Why do I run Debian instead of RedHat? apt-get I want to install Bugzilla. The Bugzilla RPM has a large number of dependencies. Under RedHat I have to fine and download all the dependent RPMs, and any dependencies they might have. Under Debian I type apt-get install bugzilla and it just happens. Policy Debian has a strong policy on where things should go and how things should behave. Config files MUST be in /etc. RedHat has such a policy too but most of the useful applications are in contrib and are not actually part of RedHat and so rarely adhere to the policy. Debian considers policy violations to be a bug and a package will be removed rather than having policy violations. Integrated Bug Tracking Debian's bug tracking system is integrated with the whole project. If a bug is reported, the package maintainer is nagged until it gets fixed. This happens in RedHat's core packages but not with contrib where it's anyone's guess how things happen. Sensible Defaults The default settings for Debian packages are generally sensible. You get the impression that the people packaging things actually use them and know them inside-out, so the defaults reflect real-world situations. By contrast, RedHat's paid packagers may not necessarily use the packages they work on but rather are ensuring that RedHat can tick a box. Case in point: dhcpd under RedHat. It fails to create a leases file and the default config file does not work. This may make sense (though not the leases file) but when you run /etc/rc.d./init.d/dhcpd start you get _NO_ output, nothing explaining what went wrong. More For more rant-worthy material, see http://www.rumble.net/whyredhatsucks.html -- Rev Simon Rumble [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rumble.net Send email with subject send key pub for public key. Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal - Martin Luther King, Jr. msg23136/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
On Thu 02 May, Rev Simon Rumble bloviated thus: For more rant-worthy material, see http://www.rumble.net/whyredhatsucks.html Doh, that should be http://www.rumble.net/redhatsucks.html -- Rev Simon Rumble [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rumble.net Send email with subject send key pub for public key. Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. - John F. Kennedy msg23142/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:02:40PM +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote: That said, Debian isn't generally supported directly by independent software vendors such as Oracle, IBM, etc. That is changing, but you may find it harder in the short term. SuSE and Red Hat enjoy good support from many ISVs. Actually Bdale Garbee has some interesting information about this from HP (his employer). When they ship their server blade machines they are preinstalled with Debian [1]. Worldwide about 40% are returned with payment and requests for Redhat, SuSE or Turbolinux dominating geographically (US/Europe/Asia). The other thing to note is that as distributions and other software vendors start supporting/complying with the LSB this will be even less of an issue. Oracle (for example) would love to say We support any Linux distribution that complies with LSB 1.1. That would break their dependence upon RedHat/SuSE for Linux installs. Those kinds of ISVs don't really care what distribution you use just as long as it runs their stuff well and is simple to support. Anand [1]: Because there are no licencing or per unit fees for Debian. -- `` We are shaped by our thoughts, we become what we think. When the mind is pure, joy follows like a shadow that never leaves. '' -- Buddha, The Dhammapada -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Rev Simon Rumble wrote: I've answered this question before but I signed over my copyright to one Kerry Packer, so I'll write it again... Why do I run Debian instead of RedHat? apt-get I want to install Bugzilla. The Bugzilla RPM has a large number of dependencies. Under RedHat I have to fine and download all the dependent RPMs, and any dependencies they might have. Under Debian I type apt-get install bugzilla and it just happens. Other people have mentioned this ad nausuem, so I won't rant about it. All I'm going to say is: rhn_register up2date bugzilla admittedly, I'm not more than 40% confident that bugzilla is acutally an RPM in redhats official little list that up2date can get for you... Your other points are still valid though... Why the bananas do I work for a stupid little company that insists that I use redhat everywhere? One other point that no-one seems to have made yet: Red Hat seem to believe more strongly than most in release early, release often - hence RH7.0 coming out with (what I believe were) pretty major flaws - installing a libc and a gcc that were incompatible, etc.. The main reason I don't know this for sure is that I was scared away by all the bad press I heard.. On the other hand, R7.1 was nice, and 7.2 is nicer.. Debian, on the other hand, seem to believe stronly that if you can't do it right, don't bother doing it at all - the last official release of debian was potato, and that came out while I was still at uni - almost two years ago now - which means that its very dated - but still works. Woody has been in the works since then, and has been in the we'll-get-it-out-next-month,we-promise stage for at least 6 months - but theres no chance its going to come out until they have it perfect... -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
On Fri 03 May, Zhasper bloviated thus: rhn_register up2date bugzilla admittedly, I'm not more than 40% confident that bugzilla is acutally an RPM in redhats official little list that up2date can get for you... This is the problem. Much of the truly useful stuff isn't released by RedHat. Debian has MANY more packages. Woody has been in the works since then, and has been in the we'll-get-it-out-next-month,we-promise stage for at least 6 months - but theres no chance its going to come out until they have it perfect... Was due to be released yesterday but was postponed because it's still not ready. Not much to go now and it should be a couple of weeks. (famous last words :) -- Rev Simon Rumble [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rumble.net Send email with subject send key pub for public key. Imagine a very committed funeral home director, whose proudest achievement in adulthood was to be elected president of the Queenbeyan and District Funeral Home Directors' Association--then halve his personality and halve it again, and you have pretty well got John Howard. - Bill Bryson from Down Under msg23153/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 11:21, Alex Samad wrote: With out starting a distro war. I am currently running redhat 7.2 and SuSe 7.3 Sparc. I have just started attending the slug meetings and I have been hearing a lot Debian. Can people comment on the differences between the two. Both the lay out of the file system and the its package manager. Are there things that I can get for Debian that I can't for Redhat or vis versa. Please note I usually try to download source packages and compile and install and use the rpm for convenience Can take this off line and mail directly to me. If we do keep this on list, can we PLEASE all try to be rational and not flame people for thinking differently... -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
I pick Redhat because Lotus Domino server runs on it. Not sure about Debian but Debian seems not so popular in Lotus Notes community. My impression is that Debian is newer than Redhat so possibly Redhat is more stable. Cheers Lee Linux newbie _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
I pick Redhat because Lotus Domino server runs on it. Not sure about Debian but Debian seems not so popular in Lotus Notes community. My impression is that Debian is newer than Redhat so possibly Redhat is more stable. Without starting a war... and being a long time debian user and fan. I have disagree. Debian while being more bleeding edge by offering users the option to apt-get testing and unstable releases. However I must comment that debian releases (aka stable tree) are always very stable. If anything, have less security issues then the rushed out redhat releases we use to see. However this is my opinion only. Thanks Powered by telstra.com -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
I've been using RH for years, and recently I'm starting to switch over to Debian. If you are basically looking for a Desk Top, I would be inclined to stick to RH.. it's much easier and less stress. If you are looking at a server, use Debian. It's much safer and far more robust. Apt-get leaves rpm for dead, and the security is easily better. File system is not so different to be a problem, from what I've seen, but Debian is much stricter in the way it's laid out and directories are used, so in the end it's more predictable. Debian assumes you know what you are doing, Redhat assumes you DON'T know what you are doing. Just personal observations.. from the point of view of a non-expert. David. On Thu, 2 May 2002, Alex Samad wrote: With out starting a distro war. I am currently running redhat 7.2 and SuSe 7.3 Sparc. I have just started attending the slug meetings and I have been hearing a lot Debian. Can people comment on the differences between the two. Both the lay out of the file system and the its package manager. Are there things that I can get for Debian that I can't for Redhat or vis versa. Please note I usually try to download source packages and compile and install and use the rpm for convenience Can take this off line and mail directly to me. Thanxs Alex -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
I have used both extensively in the past, Im no expert, my comments don't matter (but i know you'll read them.. ) At work we use Debian 2.2r3. I started out on Redhat at 4.2 and switched to debian for 8 months around the 2.1(i think) mark after absolute recommendations by a respected friend. My experiences are good for both. Redhat i still find easier for installs and the like. (but that's probably just me as I got into Debian late in the game) comment value=2c type=Clay Money worth=nadda take with a grain of salt and a lemon Basis: I don't use XWindows. this is just for Development stuff, command line, web development, databases Redhat: Positive emphasiseI/emphasise like because of it's installs and network card installs and detectection .. and it's pretty colors Negative emphasiseI/emphasise didn't like RedHat because init.d was under /etc/rc.d/ and not /etc/init.d (maybe this is a good thing. im just fussy on minor points) and they 'change default installs of the original programs' Debian: I guess, I like because I know where config stuff etc is, ie not hidden behind tools and the like, but there is always merit for tools :-)It is 'close to GNU' and I like It just 'Feels' more original .. and has that nostalgic smell. Negative: Im not much of an apt man .. ah well I tried. .. ? and now (not that anyone should care) I run RedHat 7.2 as my Dev Server, Debian is still installed on our Work machines and I will be checking out Debian-woody shortly but am not in any hurry to go chanign my dev environment as that takes too long to setup. Smoothwall (hacked to pieces for my satellite connection with iHug) toms for that quick fix on a box I destroy No home debian :-( my_motto I love it when stuff works! /my_motto /comment - ramon. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Green Sent: Thursday, 2 May 2002 12:16 PM To: Slug (E-mail) Subject: Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 11:21, Alex Samad wrote: With out starting a distro war. I am currently running redhat 7.2 and SuSe 7.3 Sparc. I have just started attending the slug meetings and I have been hearing a lot Debian. Can people comment on the differences between the two. Both the lay out of the file system and the its package manager. Are there things that I can get for Debian that I can't for Redhat or vis versa. Please note I usually try to download source packages and compile and install and use the rpm for convenience Can take this off line and mail directly to me. If we do keep this on list, can we PLEASE all try to be rational and not flame people for thinking differently... -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
Hi, David you sum up one of my other opinions exactly... I've been using RH for years, and recently I'm starting to switch over to Debian. If you are basically looking for a Desk Top, I would be inclinedto stick to RH.. it's much easier and less stress. If you are looking at a server, use Debian. It's much safer and far more robust. Apt-get leavesrpm for dead, and the security is easily better. Totally agree that Redhat makes a nice desktop platform, as does Debian, however Debian truely makes a perfect server platform :) apt- get is cool :) Powered by telstra.com -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian or Redhat
--- Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have just started attending the slug meetings and I have been hearing a lot Debian. Can people comment on the differences between the two. I found this description helpful. The author compares dpkg to rpm. A Red Hat user's introduction to Debian http://debian-br.sourceforge.net/txt/debian_vs_redhat.html - Mark A. Bell http://www.users.bigpond.com/m487396 __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
I am loathe to do this for a few reasons. It's a pain in the neck They work fine now why screw around with them ( I am in the process of upgrades and a security review) If someone feels confident in screwing around with these machines doesn't that make it more likely they will and hence a security risk/possible problem exists. Why does he want them swapped over ? The difference isn't that great. You could always offer to write up some doc's on changing the different things under debian for him. Still a a pain, but mayeb less so. Jason -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Gareth Walters wrote:
..snip
Am I just being stubborn? Do I have a point?
Are there some more points to be made?
TIA for any and all discussion/advice/opinions
Basically, your bosses approach is correct, in that any business should
not depend on one person to run (that is what all this quality
certification is about). It is generally known as the "fall under a bus"
test.
The best way to fight it is;
1 - technical arguments along the line that Debian is more secure (if it
is = no flame wars, I'm not interested)
2 - cost to the business of doing so,
3 - producing documentation that allows any linux person to maintain it,
4 - producing a list of Debian help resources,
5 - showing that you can sign a support contract for debian systems, e.g
I guess Linuxcare will do this.
6 - ask the boss to rate the priority and always have more
important/higher priority work that needs doing {:-), (but I didn't tell
you this)
--
Terry Collins {:-)}}} Ph(02) 4627 2186 Fax(02) 4628 7861
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.woa.com.au
WOA Computer Services lan/wan, linux/unix, novell
"People without trees are like fish without clean water"
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
I think all your boss wants is some form of redundency (for lack of better terms) ie if you go on holidays or leave who is capable of supporting the Debian systems? probably if you want to keep the Debian boxes you might need to bite the bullet and try trainning some staff memebers in the finer points of Debian. with regards to security/proxy/and mail get them to learn the stuff themselves just my 2 cens worth Kevin G'day all, My boss has asked me to convert our 2 Debian boxes (the firewall and the mail server/Web proxy) from Debian to RedHat for the sole reason that I am the only person with any Debain experience and he would feel better if more people could fix any problems that arose (in case I was not around for some reason) -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
On 29 Nov, Gareth Walters scribbled: - G'day all, - My boss has asked me to convert our 2 Debian boxes (the firewall and the - mail server/Web proxy) from Debian to RedHat for the sole reason that I am - the only person with any Debain experience and he would feel better if more - people could fix any problems that arose (in case I was not around for some - reason) - - I am loathe to do this for a few reasons. - - It's a pain in the neck - They work fine now why screw around with them ( I am in the process of - upgrades and a security review) - If someone feels confident in screwing around with these machines doesn't - that make it more likely they will and hence a security risk/possible - problem exists. - - - Am I just being stubborn? Do I have a point? - Are there some more points to be made? no - you're boss has a good point. I recently installed debian at home.. and I can say that it's a royal pain to get used to new places for things - nto to mention incompatible versions of software where the same program (namely last night it was dhcpd - before that other things) have different formats for their config files and configs can't just be moved over... the only reaosn i can do this is because i've been around linux for a while and i spend all my days in linux writing code for it.. just think of some poor dude who kinda knwos linux reasonably - but on redhat -like systems (the vast majority) and coems to a debain box.. he's lost. you're boss has a good point. you won't be around forever - hell even if the business expands and you are around.. you may fund you have more important things to do and you need someone else to look after boxes. then it will become important too. yup - you're being stubborn. -- --- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Gareth Walters wrote: My boss has asked me to convert our 2 Debian boxes (the firewall and the mail server/Web proxy) from Debian to RedHat for the sole reason that I am the only person with any Debain experience and he would feel better if more Am I just being stubborn? Do I have a point? Are there some more points to be made? Well I seam to differ from what seams to be the popular opinion sprouted so far. If you are going to take the more people know RedHat than Debian route then why not install Windows. More people know that and they will be cheaper. You chose Debian for a reason, if those reasons were valid then that has not changed. Are there people with RedHat experiance around or does he just perceve that they will be easier to get if they are required. Rodos -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, Camion Technology | most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we +61 2 9873 5105 | come in; we're computer professionals. We cause | accidents. [Nathaniel Borenstein] -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Taking Terry's line completely out of context: in that any business should not depend on one person to run (that is what all this quality certification is about). Let me turn this on its head. Every organisation relies on the efforts of its members. For businesses, the members may be called staff. People do valuable things. They contain knowledge, they have varying talents, they contribute in different ways. Some people, extremely talented ones, contribute far more than others. People are not replaceable, not interchangeable. You can't replace one talented motivated person with ten indifferent people. When people are valued, when their beliefs, their customs, their way of thinking is respected, when the organisation goes to some trouble to respect that way of thinking, then people respond by assisting that organisation in ways that are unexpected, incredibly important, even vital. So an organisation that can't tolerate work environment differences, can't tolerate or take seriously a sincerely held belief, then that organisation has limited its future prospects. An organisation that arbitrarily mandates certain operating systems or certain software, limits the ability of employees to be creative, to be in charge of their lives; runs the risk of producing a clone mentality, a narrow introspective outlook, of alienating talented key staff. Jamie -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Gareth, I've sifted through the responses thus far and think I have something to add. A few months ago I first played with Debian, two weeks later all Redhat /sparc/intel/ppc servers globally (about 20) in my company were running Debian and all new Linux servers are being built as Debian at the expense of RedHat/Solaris. The reason for this big turn around? Manageability, syncronicity. I am no hacker, I'm an admin and I'm interested in making my life easier while still getting top performance/reliability - Debian does that. There was no great leap of logic for me to get my head around Debian as an admin who had used RedHat almost exclusively for 5+ years. It also has the advantage of being a SysV layout like much of Solaris, which is one of the most popular Unix systems for "certified" people. Debian systems are by far the easiest I've had to manage with the added bonus of being able to have identical systems on different hardware. It's a no brainer. Compared to managing other Linux distributions, Debian is the easiest and other certified professionals (ie Solaris admins) will be far more familiar with Debian and it's workings than RH due to the filesystem structure. Debian is more rock solid and secure (out of the box) and is far more practical as a server (or workstation) in any business environment. You'll need to educate both your boss and your colleagues, show them how things work in Debian (esp apt-get by example). Explain the Debian "Stable" releases and security update processes. Failing that, take your boss out to lunch with Angus and Jeff Waugh as it was they who convinced me over dinner to give Debian a second look after I initially floundered with Slink. Good luck. You contact me as reference point should you need to go that far. On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 09:28:56 Gareth Walters wrote: G'day all, My boss has asked me to convert our 2 Debian boxes (the firewall and the mail server/Web proxy) from Debian to RedHat for the sole reason that I am the only person with any Debain experience and he would feel better if more people could fix any problems that arose (in case I was not around for some reason) I am loathe to do this for a few reasons. It's a pain in the neck They work fine now why screw around with them ( I am in the process of upgrades and a security review) If someone feels confident in screwing around with these machines doesn't that make it more likely they will and hence a security risk/possible problem exists. Am I just being stubborn? Do I have a point? Are there some more points to be made? TIA for any and all discussion/advice/opinions -Gareth Walters -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug -- Cheers, Craige. -- Apt-get a clue. Apt-get Debian. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Jamie, do you think you could shorten that up to 4 lines? People will annoyed when I start using that as my signature. Let me turn this on its head. Every organisation relies on the efforts of its members. For businesses, the members may be called staff. People do valuable things. They contain knowledge, they have varying talents, they contribute in different ways. Some people, extremely talented ones, contribute far more than others. People are not replaceable, not interchangeable. You can't replace one talented motivated person with ten indifferent people. When people are valued, when their beliefs, their customs, their way of thinking is respected, when the organisation goes to some trouble to respect that way of thinking, then people respond by assisting that organisation in ways that are unexpected, incredibly important, even vital. So an organisation that can't tolerate work environment differences, can't tolerate or take seriously a sincerely held belief, then that organisation has limited its future prospects. An organisation that arbitrarily mandates certain operating systems or certain software, limits the ability of employees to be creative, to be in charge of their lives; runs the risk of producing a clone mentality, a narrow introspective outlook, of alienating talented key staff. Jamie -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug -- Cheers, Craige. -- Apt-get a clue. Apt-get Debian. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Jamie, do you think you could shorten that up to 4 lines? People will annoyed when I start using that as my signature. I sure wish my company thought that way. Aaron -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
RE: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Hi Gareth, Three words. "DEAD RAT SUCKS" and its true, imho. Before everyone flames me again I do acknowledge that RedHat the company does a lot of good stuff for Linux, its just a shame their distro is swiss cheese. Get one of your RedHat engineers and show them what a real distro can do. You'll convert them easily enough, and then the problem the boss see's will no longer be relevant. Cheers, Marty On Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:29 AM, Gareth Walters [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: G'day all, My boss has asked me to convert our 2 Debian boxes (the firewall and the mail server/Web proxy) from Debian to RedHat for the sole reason that I am the only person with any Debain experience and he would feel better if more people could fix any problems that arose (in case I was not around for some reason) I am loathe to do this for a few reasons. It's a pain in the neck They work fine now why screw around with them ( I am in the process of upgrades and a security review) If someone feels confident in screwing around with these machines doesn't that make it more likely they will and hence a security risk/possible problem exists. Am I just being stubborn? Do I have a point? Are there some more points to be made? TIA for any and all discussion/advice/opinions -Gareth Walters -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Debian Vs RedHat Request for advice/discussion
Thank you to all those who responded. Although there are some very valid managerial reasons why to go along with my supervisor's insructions I will be trying my hardest to keep them as Debian machines and educate the other users who might have to take some responsibility for them. The simple fact is that I think Debian is better for the job than RedHat and so we will use it. ---Gareth -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
