 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> out of curiosity, what are his reasons for that recommendation?
Last time I asked him to configure some sophisticated stuff in OpenSuSE, it
was more desktoppy than servery, apparently. Like, the configuration of the
IP address and stuff sticks to the MAC address in SuSE, but to the card slot
in Ubuntu, so if you want to configure a disk you're going to mail to
someone to stick in a machine in a different city, it's harder with SuSE.
That was the bit that bit me, for example. Binding two network cards in a
fail-over configuration was apparently not as easy as it could be too.
I'm not real sure I got all his reasons, but he's been a UNIX guru since
well before Solaris was called SunOS, and he seemed to think it was
unnecessarily difficult to set things up there. So I asked "where do you
download RedHat from, or what do you use instead." He said Ubuntu. <shrug>
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Ouch ouch ouch!"
"What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
"No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:07:20 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> out of curiosity, what are his reasons for that recommendation?
>
> Last time I asked him to configure some sophisticated stuff in OpenSuSE,
> it was more desktoppy than servery, apparently. Like, the configuration
> of the IP address and stuff sticks to the MAC address in SuSE, but to
> the card slot in Ubuntu, so if you want to configure a disk you're going
> to mail to someone to stick in a machine in a different city, it's
> harder with SuSE. That was the bit that bit me, for example. Binding two
> network cards in a fail-over configuration was apparently not as easy as
> it could be too.
>
> I'm not real sure I got all his reasons, but he's been a UNIX guru since
> well before Solaris was called SunOS, and he seemed to think it was
> unnecessarily difficult to set things up there. So I asked "where do you
> download RedHat from, or what do you use instead." He said Ubuntu.
> <shrug>
Thanks. Network config is something that I've heard works very
differently, and even on SLES8 (granted, two major versions ago), it was
tied to MAC addresses which made imaging very difficult (especially as it
retained the old address and used it when the MAC changed - which I
thought was really odd).
I remember SunOS as well. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> My sysadmin guru says to use Ubuntu for servers these days, but I've been
> using openSuSE, so ... I need to figure out where to get the packages I use
> in a way that Ubuntu likes. This is what happens when you start getting
> incompatible competition in Linux releases. :-)
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19990303
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19990303
(chortle!) Sent along, just in case.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Ouch ouch ouch!"
"What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
"No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> As another guess, I think KNOPPIX is defaulting to using the "unstable"
> branch rather than the "stable" branch, meaning it picks packages that
> depend on whole new versions of libc and other critical infrastructure.
>
> Telling it to pick the newest package from "stable" seems to make
> everything work beautifully. I wonder why KNOPPIX is set this way?
Because...
> OTOH... I asked for GHC, and I got version 6.6. That's *years* old
> (current version is 6.10.1 - although note they skip odd-numbered
> versions). Maybe that's why?
... stable is ment to be stable, so all the software getting to Debian
Stable is in testing -phase for a long time. Unstable is more like
bleeding edge.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
