similar to: Re: Demonizing generic Linux issues as Fedora Core-only issues -- WAS: Hi, Bryan

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > Yes, but... whose choice was it to ship 2.6 with lots of broken > and omitted stuff when 2.4 works better for many things? Again, 2-2-2, 6-6-6 At some point, Red Hat has to start the new series for "early adopters." That means being the first to adopt the new GLibC, GCC, kernel, etc... Looking at just the GLibC 2+ generations

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > I'm still wondering about that... If anyone except Linus himself > even suggested that changing kernel interfaces in a way that would > break device drivers was a good thing, I can't imagine the reaction. > I could see that the changes through 2.4 were improving things, but > is there anything that is measurably better in

Even I've left this thread. I guess we're all waiting for Lee to turn Blue. ;-> Or is it Red (Hat)? ;-> Okay Lee, we all agree, Red Hat makes stupid decisions, adopts buggy software - especially the kernel and Red Hat is to blame for the decisions in the kernel, and also stupidly backports fixes instead of adopting newer versions with the fixes. And there is absolutely no need for

From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> > This is not really true. We will probably never have everything that FC > has as added features ... but CentOS-4 has several added features and we > have been out for only a 3 months (so, not required to wait a year). Oh, sorry, I should have clarified. What I meant by "wait a year" was the time from the first .0 or

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > Thanks - as you probably know, the long-winded discussion isn't > really about CIPE specifically so much as the philosophy behind > bundling a few thousand things together and then trying to > please anyone with a blanket policy about maintaining backwards > compatibility vs bug fixes vs new features. You just can't

From: Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com> > I have a real problem with this thread. It seems as if, according to some, > someone can only be with or against Red Hat. Yes, that was my major complaint too. > I'm sure Red Hat has made stupid decisions, has adopted buggy software and > are responsible for some of the headaches people have had. And I'm sure > even Red Hat

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > No, I am looking for a solution that provides what a typical user needs, > not what a particular vendor feels like supporting this week. I didn't > really want this to be about motives for vendor's business decisions but > I think Johnny Hughes nailed it in saying the push for 2.6 was because > SLES 9 had it. Their

From: R P Herrold <herrold at owlriver.com> > Bryan - Please don't overstate this and make a problem where > none exists. There is an infinity of choices of which you > list three ... > Nor does one _have_ to 'get involved' with either the > RH-Fedora or Centos project to do effective distribution > building, or add-on packaging. There are independent

From: Collins Richey <crichey at gmail.com> > It's a little more than that. I find few people who consider RedHat to > be a Demon Evil or that they can't do anything right, but I can > understand the concern about some of their decisions which have made > life difficult for (granted) a few, and it's not really helpful to > demonize those who complain, as Bryan has

From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> > We would not build and distribute either of these things if they were > not released via the GPL. The RPMS/SRPMS that we are distributing are > indeed GPL. We firmly agree with RedHat on this issue (that only GPL > things should be distributed). The problem is that many distros are statically building MySQL 4 with some

Hello everyone, Last week the CVS version of tinc gained the ability to run under Windows, in a Cygwin environment (http://www.cygwin.com), making use of the virtual network driver from the CIPE project (http://cipe-win32.sourceforge.net/). Preparations were also being made to support Windows without Cygwin. Today James Yonan of OpenVPN (http://openvpn.sourceforge.net/) anounced a port of

First of all, My apologies for this maybe slight OT post, but I have so much confidence and read so much good replies on this list, that I am still asking my question. I''m looking for a linux distribution to use on our school''s homemade routers. The routers are small miniITX based systems with 2 network interfaces. I added a 4 port D-Link network card in some cases, when I

Hi list, I have tried google but just cant get this to work or figure it out. My setup ======== vanilla 2.6.13 kernel with CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_RR=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_RANDOM=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_WRANDOM=y CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_DRR=y My configuration: A host with two ppp links. Ontop of these two ppp dialup

Hi all - sorry for the off-topic posting - just that the list of consultants on the samba site is horrendously out of date! I thought that this would be the best place for me to find suitable resources... firstly I would like to say thanks a million to all the samba team for your ongoing efforts and great product. I just wish I had more time to experiment with it! We have the startings of a good

Hello, I have running tinc on my several linux boxes and now I am trying to install tinc on my WinXP box. I can't understand what kind of VPN interface I should install - CIPE or TAP which included into the windows tinc package ? Another question is about variable "Interface =" in the tinc.conf file. What name should I use ? Regards, Igor Belokopytov Tinc: Discussion

I've set up a CIPE VPN, between my notebook computer and my Linux based firewall. While the VPN generally works well, I've noticed a strange problem with file sharing from the local network to the notebook. I set up the VPN, with the idea of accessing my systems at home via a dial up ISP, to my home network via cable modem. The VPN works well for most protocols, such as telnet,

From: Dag Wieers > Bryan, stop generalising and dramatising. What dramatising? At some point, several people decide that anything they dislike was said by me. Several other people said far more negative comments about CIPE than myself. Those comments have now been attributed to me. I purposely avoided making it about whether or not CIPE should or shouldn't not be included, just why it

From: Feizhou <feizhou at graffiti.net> > I still remember the FIRST Linux GUI installer for a Linux distro. It > came on the Caldera Openlinux 2.2. It worked. It was really nice. Actually, the first distro with a GUI installer was Yggdrasil, circa 1993. It installed on 8MB of RAM using X and Athena/FVWM. > The Novell guys that were behind Caldera deserve plenty of respect for

From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> > IBM has since totally changed their thoughts with regards to GNU/Linux. Actually, their cut-off of Monterey had everything to do with their current change in strategy on Linux back in 2000+. Monterey was established before IBM's interest in GNU/Linux. After IBM realized that it could use an economical complement in Linux, it saw

Evening, I've got * asterisk up and running with nufone account for inbound and outbound calls from the world... everything works quite nicely except that I noticed last night that when I have a call active from * to nufone, web surfing on the network slows to a crawl... additionally, I have a VPN tunnel to another office (using CIPE) and while inter-office (i.e. - SIP to SIP) calls