[Tfug] Newbie Follow-Up Question

[Harry McGregor]

On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Bowie J. Poag wrote:

> ghrprphm... hold on... this flamethrower is heavy.

OK, and I thought this one was for me... I guess I don't even register
enough to get flamed... -:)

> grrrhmph.. Ok. (*chik!* *chik!*) Phlooooffffffffffffffffff....barbecue time!
>
>
> void flame_on(char *distrib)
> {
>
> Why am I the target of ridicule for telling someone the quickest path to
> what they're looking for?

Because you did not understand the problem (I sent a rather detailed
solution, since I happend to know more of the setup than Chris refered to
in the email).

If Redhat is the solution, you need to restate the problem.

> > > I don't want to start any flame wars here but I took
> > > their advice and it works for me and I am up and
> > > running. After I have a chance to take CIS 225 at
> > > Pima, perhaps I will switch to Debian but for now Red
> > > Hat works just fine for me.
>
> (chuckle)   ...See?  :)  He's a happy camper. Big smile on his face.

That simile will go away when he tries to keep it updated, and running
smoothly, through all of the security problems/patches/updates.  The one
good thing is at least it is not a redhat .0 release, those are almost as
bad as a Microsoft .1 release.

> > Yikes. That's a messy way of upgrading.
>
> Oh the humanity! How is ditching an outdated cult distribution and

Try reading what the message was talking about, it was talking about
upgrading mozilla.  Using the .tar.gz distribution is really really a bad
way to go about keeping the system updated.  I can understand rolling from
source, when needed, but stepping outside of the package management
system, on purpose, for something as simple as a Mozilla update is asking
for trouble.

As far as debian being a cult distribution, and outdated, that is because
you are looking at "stable".  I don't run stable on ANY of my servers
(about 10 of them), or on any of my workstations (about 120).  I run
woody/testing on my servers (with the exception of a few running sid), and
I run sid/unstable on my workstations.

All of the software is up to date, and very stable, as well as being
tracked in the package management database.  Installing some random tar
will not get the package tracked.  Installing a random .rpm will get it
tracked on redhat, but it won't do you much good when you start going
through dependancy hell.

> installing something thats actually supported by the bulk of the Linux
> community a 'messy way of upgrading' ?

Read the post you are refering to before trying to flame things that were
not even stated (better luck next time).

>  Keep drinking the Debian kool-aid
> and you'll end up like this guy did... Painting yourself into a corner of a
> boat thats floating down shit creek without a paddle.

Well, I was intending to help Chris with his problem at the last meeting,
unfortunatly he did not show up as planned.  The problem was due to a bug
in the current woody snapshot cds (setting stable as the apt source
instead of testing).

> > The whole reason for choosing a distribution is how they
> > provide updates to their packages as new versions come out.
>
> If I had a third hand, i'd bitch slap you with it. The other two are busy
> holding my head in grief contemplating this tarnished ass-nugget of wisdom
> you've just provided. Don't mislead him. Your statement could not possibly
> be more incorrect.

And why is that?  You spend how much of your time installing?  How much of
your time making sure that the system is up to date, and security patched,
and running smoothly?

Yes, the debian install is a little more painful the first 10-20 times you
install, but the ease of management in the long run pays for itself in no
time at all.

> Everyone knows the only reason for choosing a distribution is whether it
> sucks or not. Its an incontrivertable fact that Debian sucks. Theres no
> point to even entering into a debate over the issue, because the instant you
> take an opposing view, you automatically proclaim that you suck as well..
> And thats just not right.

And that contains ohhh so much wisdom...

> Actually, there are a couple reasons (only two, mind you..) why you would
> ever install Debian. First is, you're a masochist. The sensation of pain
> excites you, especially the constant throbbing sort that never goes away and
> just gets worse with time.  That, or you notice that dogs have the ability
> to beam messages directly into your brain commanding you to murder. In which
> case, Debian is perfect for you.

Debian is a very expert friendly distro, it makes things easy, once you
pass the learning clif, before you pass it, they seem very hard.  It's
quite strange that most of my students at pima seem to be able to install
debian on their own after only installing it three or four times as a
class.  This is actualy far less than is normaly required for someone to
learn how to install Windows 2000 server or Windows 2000 Advanced server.

> > Keep your posts short.
>
> Ok. :)
>
> /* flame off! */
>
> }


			Harry
> _______________________________________________
> tfug mailing list
> tfug@tfug.org
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug
>

--
Harry McGregor, CEO, Co-Founder
Hmcgregor@osef.org, (520) 661-7875 (CELL)
Open Source Education Foundation, http://www.osef.org