[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       quanta
Subject:    Re: [Quanta] Redhat 7.2 = too old a version?
From:       obennett <obennett () hartford ! edu>
Date:       2005-02-24 3:33:06
Message-ID: 200502232233.08778.obennett () hartford ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 07:37, Eric Laffoon wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 February 2005 11:55 pm, Dennis Dixon wrote:
> > It's starting to look like my linux version is too old, I have no idea
> > which rpm's I should download.  In case anybody knows which & where I can
> > get these files here is the list of dependencies lacking.
>
> I just addressed this in a recent posting here. I know people will take
> this as an opinion and I don't want to start a long discussion, but I'm
yes. it _is_ opinion. Not only is it opinion, but it is your opinion of one 
company which you are now using as a generalization for all binary using 
linux distributions. 
> going to tell you why you may as well give up and get a new distribution...
>

> RPM seemed like a good idea to distribute binaries on Linux, however the
> only reason for a user to want a binary is if it takes a long time to
> compile which it certainly did in the last decade.
and still does in this decade. 
And there are other reasons to distribute binaries, of course. Like ease of 
install for those who use binaries that come with proper package management 
(Mandrake and Debian anyone?)
> However the problems 
> started when Red Hat began to apply the technology...
> 1) installing libraries to OS release specs instead of a legacy support
> 2) splitting and shuffling packages in ways that made OS release version
> differences
> 3) introducing artificial dependencies into the package build
>
> The result of this worked well. RPMs started out rather compatible and
> quickly became incompatible between minor release versions from the same
> vendor. Why? Red Hat was selling boxed sets and wanted you to buy a new
> one. A source based system (remember "open source"?) would navigate this
> and install what it needed. It turns out that end users weren't lucrative
> enough and now they only sell a per seat license for servers. They do have
> a free package but it's permanent beta and they don't even develop for the
> desktop (their CEO declared Linux not ready) while they hack up the
> software to make RPMs. Everything from disk partitioning to KDE is not set
> up as the software is released by the developers.
>
> Back to your concern, it should be possible to upgrade RH 7.2 as it's not
> that old, but RPM is ill suited to upgrade and works best wiping your
RPM by itself is ill suited but it was never meant for upgrades. proper 
dependency handling tools like urpmi are needed for that.
> system files. I switched to Gentoo when it appeared RPM was the root of
> evil and I don't shuffle CDs and I can optionally run KDE 2.2 along side
> the current version if I want. 
And I switched back from gentoo to mandrake when i decided i rather spend time 
doing work than compiling software. I don't shuffle CDs either, that's what 
DVDs are for. And who cares about kde 2.2 what the hell does that have to do 
with anything really? 
> My point is that the upgrade problem you 
> face is artificially created by a number of design decisions Red Hat
> pioneered to offer you freedom in one hand and make you dependant on their
> upgrade cycles and packages in the other... Then they decided that you
> weren't profitable enough to sell and service what they hacked up and
> decided they would offer a permanent beta.
I don't have a point, but I will point out that in IRC the vast majority of 
weird problems are experience by gentoo users, next comes debian followed by 
fedora. For all your praise it would seem that "gentoo the mighty"  isn't the 
shining beacon you make it out to be.
>
> Did you know that trainers of service professionals teach that if you can
> very quickly solve a problem for a customer you will develop substantially
> higher customer loyalty than if everything works perfect? RH is a service
> business leader. I used to work for a computer printer company in 1979 that
> built in inherent weak points into the design that we could find and fix in
> minutes. They sold service contracts based on $125 per repair... In fact
> the only part of the company that was profitable was the repair division.
> When I look at Red Hat I see a grand service tradition.
I can no longer tell you what I see when i look at gentoo, it's kind of 
unprintable. 
>
> http://distrowatch.com
yes i am in sort of a bad mood, today isn't the day for flaimbaiters, even 
when they're the head of the coolest web DE around.
<insert random http address here> 

And finally back to the poster. I suggest you try new distros. Hell you might 
even like gentoo, but if binary is your thing give SuSE, Mandrake, or even 
ubuntu a try (latest "must use" distro). Redhat 7.2 is sufficiently far 
remove from everything out there (even Redhat/Fedora's current offereing) 
that you may as well be just using a different distro.

@ Eric, with all due respect, next time stick to the topic at hand instead of 
going of on jaundiced aside's lest you incur the wroth "Trollzor - scourge of 
the ML"
OK, back to work now...
-- 
Jesus loves me. You should too.
_______________________________________________
Quanta mailing list
Quanta@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/quanta

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]