Stupid RedHat sysadmin wannabees
Jonathan Guthrie
> So. They don't ever compile. Their attitude is: if I must
> install it, I'll get the RPM; if it's not in an RPM, nobody wants
> it. RPMs have default configuration inside. It's reasonable.
> Compiled-in parameters are sacred. If you want something else,
> don't want it. It's what the Smart RedHat People[tm] gave you,
> shut up and be happy.
Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
crapware you're trying to distribute.
I'm a little disappointed, but not particularly surprised, at the
attitude taken by the Smart RedHat People[tm] and their minions. Of
course, as long as I have everything I need, I don't normally take
much notice of what they do, but sometimes I want to pack it all in
finish up Osiris, the OS I started back in 1988.
Usually, I just go to bed. When I wake up, it's gone.
The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
years.
Jake Riddoch
thusly:
>Here they are, classical RedHat Linux sysadmin wannabees. CS
>students.
Oh, those... "I have RedHat linux at home, therefore I'm a sysadmin".
>They love distributions.
Distributions are ok in that you can have a system up and running
quickly. Personally, I can't be bothered dowloading a kernel, building
it, then downloading the other packages and compiling them when I can
have a reasonable system.
> They love the idea that they should not
>ever compile anything. make(1) is the sacred, and, therefore,
>forbidden command from them, let alone cc(1).
I have RedHat 5.0 and have compiled up zsh-3.0.5, Apache, Qt libraries,
KDE (inc libraries, support, utils and of course, games), enlightenment
(with sound) and a few other minor doobries.
> Just asked them if
>they know ed. No, they're not. And one of them told me, "only
>sick people use ed". Maybe it's correct, we all are sick. But
>if you're not sick enough, why sysadmin?
I know of ed, but have never bothered learning it. I suppose I really
should for hard core problem fixing, but I get by fine with vi most of
the time.
>So. They don't ever compile. Their attitude is: if I must
>install it, I'll get the RPM; if it's not in an RPM, nobody wants
>it. RPMs have default configuration inside. It's reasonable.
>Compiled-in parameters are sacred. If you want something else,
>don't want it. It's what the Smart RedHat People[tm] gave you,
>shut up and be happy.
See above. I believe RPM's are available for some of them. As far as
I'm concerned, a freshly compiled setup on my machine will be optimised
to my processor, not a generic i386 binary.
>They use RedHat menu systems for lusers.
The menu system is fine when you can't be bothered reading man pages for
something. That said, I ignore the comments in /etc/fstab "You should
be using control panel to edit this!" Sod that, gimme vi.
> They think that
>patching libc, compiling software, changing defaults and such are
>"raping the OS", so they don't. Nothing that can't be done using
>RedHat menus is worth doing. Shit.
Try getting a decent XF86Config file using RedHat menu system. It's
nigh on impossible. I just hacked mine today.
Isn't "raping the OS" part of the attraction of linux anyway? The fact
you _can_ fsck about with it.
>[3] Haven't you damn lusers ever heard that some things should be
> compiled in, for the sake of the magic of security reasons?
Apart from which, there is the performance advantage of compiled in
options. This is what ./configure --enable-option is for!!
>=============
>The Pop Music
>=============
>
>They listen to their dumb fscking pop music. Loud. In the lab.
>Making it hard to concentrate and actually _work_[7]. And I
>don't think anyone except of them likes their music. Fsck, if I
>want to listen to the music, I either use headphones, or don't do
>it at all.
Official policy at our site is "no listening to CD's in the lab."
Unofficial policy is "If you use headphones and don't annoy anyone else,
playing CD's is ok."
>They are complete lusers. There is a certain type of Linuxers
>who have Microsoft Windoze 95 attitude. Working with menus.
They're the worst. They have linux so they think they're cool. Half of
them probably couldn't debug stuff without having their hand held.
>Vadik, wishing to kill them all now.
*comfort* Try this:
echo "if [ $USER == "L1" -o $USER="L2" ]; then stty erase s; fi" >>
/etc/bashrc [1]
This isn't too hard to get out of, but does take a bit of unix
knowledge, which these guys don't appear to have. Alternative is stty
erase ' ' which they might have a harder time working round...:)
Besides which, chances are they'll never find it.
If you don't have root access, you could always set up a fake 'ls'
script; chances are they'll have . in their path[3]
1/ It's the RedHat default shell; if RedHat think it's good it must
be![2]
2/ according to them, it seems.
3/ isn't that default under RedHat as well? I can't remember
off-hand[4]
4/ I removed it for PATH out of habit.
--
Jake Riddoch http://www.larien.demon.co.uk/
"Windows has detected that a gnat has farted near your computer. Press any key
to reboot." - Simon Oke in the scary devil monastery
Lionel Lauer
stated that:
>[1] I hate women.
Boy, I think that asr would have to be up in the top 5 worst places on
Usenet to say that.
Let me guess; unrequited love has you feeling suicidal, & you've decided
to end it all in the most baroque & messy manner possible?
>
>--
>Ryan Tucker <rtuck...@ttgcitn.com> http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/
>GSM/VM/Fax: +15157712865 Box 57083, Pleasant Hill IA 50317-0002
>"Personally, I take it as a compliment if someone quotes me, whether or
>not they ask permission." - Lionel Lauer, ASR
Cute. Very cute.
Lionel.
--
Grep bait: qmail, Archimedes Plutonium, turkey, Kibo, Wollmann, Meow.
Grep bait de jour: Theresa Willis, Terri
Perna condita delenda est. Agree? - See http://www.ybecker.net/pink/
"Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| Kibo informs me that rtucker+f...@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker)
| stated that:
|
| >[1] I hate women.
|
| to end it all in the most baroque & messy manner possible?
One supposes that fscking a Xeon might qualify. In several senses.
--
brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] all...@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator [WAY too many hats] all...@ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering
carnegie mellon university (bsa@kf8nh is still valid.)
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| work for. Listing "Linux" under OS experience is a red flag that this
| is a luser in disguise. The interview usually goes something like
+--->8
Depends on how it's listed. *cluck*
Clinton Pierce
<ja...@larien.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Vadim Vygonets <va...@trilok.cs.huji.ac.il> spake unto the Monastery
>thusly:
>>Here they are, classical RedHat Linux sysadmin wannabees. CS
>>students.
>
>Oh, those... "I have RedHat linux at home, therefore I'm a sysadmin".
>
I do the tech interviews for UNIX Admins at the consulting company I
work for. Listing "Linux" under OS experience is a red flag that this
is a luser in disguise. The interview usually goes something like
this:
BIFH[0][1]: Oh, I see you have _Linux_ as the UNIX OS you
administered.
Supplicant: Linux is Bitchin Cool. RedHat rocks.
BIFH: I see. What revision Kernel do you run?
Supplicant: Kernel? It's RedHat 5.1.
BIFH: Yes, well. How would I determine which kernel
modules are loaded? (looking for lsmod)
Supplicant: With "rpm"!
BIFH: I see. Have you got a metal ballpoint? [2]
See that wallsocket over there? Take the refill out
of the pen and poke in into the wallsocket.
Supplicant: But it's live!
B1FH: Would I really make you do it if it were live?
Supplicant: Oh" >fiddle< >fiddle< >BZZZZZZZEEEEERT!< >THUD!<
[0] Interviewer
[1] No relation to B1FF
[2] Apologies to Simon
Remove something from the address to reply in E-Mail.
Damned spammers...
Adam J. Thornton
Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> wrote:
>Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
>distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
>I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
>Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
>crapware you're trying to distribute.
Next time I get drunk and cranky I will treat you all to the Extended Dance
Remix Rant of why Linux distributions in general, and Red Hat in
particular, is a Bad Thing because it has lowered the Bar To Entry to the
point where the clueless can clamber aboard.
And then, as in the Windoze world, things start being aimed at the
clueless. And then things start to suck. Like RPMs. RPMs are great for
self-installing binary-only distributions. They're perfect for people who
want Unix to be Windows. And have you noticed how there are many fewer
SRPMs than RPMs?
I don't have enough energy or enough booze to really get rolling on it
tonight. But sometime soon...
>The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
>system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
>years.
You know, it's one of those things, like growing up. Let me explain.
Remember how, when you were little, staying up late was a big treat, and
you'd whine and plead and beg and cajole and grovel for that extra fifteen
minutes? And then sometime, usually late in high school or early in
college, you realized that without knowing it at the time, you'd passed one
of the Big Milestones of Growing Up: instead of wanting to stay up later,
you were scheming to find ways to go to bed earlier and get more sleep?
Well, it's like that. Some of us even now can remember the rush of our
first successful su. Or how cool it felt to finally be *given* the root
password to a machine that actually *did* something. But all of us have
long since passed the hump where we look for ways to *avoid* being given
root, so that we can't be blamed when something goes horribly, horribly
wrong.
Adam
--
ad...@princeton.edu
"There's a border to somewhere waiting, and a tank full of time." - J. Steinman
Ryan Tucker
>Boy, I think that asr would have to be up in the top 5 worst places on
>Usenet to say that.
>to end it all in the most baroque & messy manner possible?
I can't even manage to kill myself, which is probably a good indication
that I'm not a people person. -rt (who even got up to 117mph on a gravel
road and locked his wheels and didn't even go near a ditch)
void
want to displace Microsoft, they want to *re*place it. Grr.
On 17 Aug 1998 21:25:46 GMT, Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> wrote:
>In alt.sysadmin.recovery Vadim Vygonets <va...@trilok.cs.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>> So. They don't ever compile. Their attitude is: if I must
>> install it, I'll get the RPM; if it's not in an RPM, nobody wants
>> it. RPMs have default configuration inside. It's reasonable.
>> Compiled-in parameters are sacred. If you want something else,
>> don't want it. It's what the Smart RedHat People[tm] gave you,
>> shut up and be happy.
>
>Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
>distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
>I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
>Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
>crapware you're trying to distribute.
>
>I'm a little disappointed, but not particularly surprised, at the
>attitude taken by the Smart RedHat People[tm] and their minions. Of
>course, as long as I have everything I need, I don't normally take
>much notice of what they do, but sometimes I want to pack it all in
>finish up Osiris, the OS I started back in 1988.
>
>Usually, I just go to bed. When I wake up, it's gone.
>
>The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
>system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
>years.
--
Ben
looking for admin/security work
Mike Sugimoto
: Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
: distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
: I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
: Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
: crapware you're trying to distribute.
Oh, God..
After the window managers war of last week, I decided to go out and
compile Enlightenment[1], just to see what all the hoopla was all about
and whether I was really justified in my choice of window manager
(olwm/fvwm2). Compiled KDE last month; I have to say I'm not terribly
impressed, and on the basis of that, am quite justified on using olwm or
fvwm2.
Well. Three "packages" that I need don't come as tarballs, and since I'm
running a Slackware distribution, I have to download RPM to see if I can
make the fscking thing work. So I get the files anyway, compile RPM, and
it seems to work okay. Then I go to try and install the RPM files.
kathryn(~/enlight)% rpm -i libtiff-3.4-4.src.rpm
cannot write to ///usr/local/src/redhat/SOURCES
error: libtiff-3.4-4.src.rpm cannot be installed
Whatever. I'm too tired to try and decipher the --help information (which
is far too complicated for the average RedHat luser); RedHat provides no
information at their Web site on how to override default installation
directories, and I'm not going to create directories and files so a
package manager can fsck around with my system at will. Hunt for rpm2tgz,
which takes me a good half an hour. It's late. I've been up for 16 hours
already. I want to get this over with.
rpm2tgz is a good thing to have if you don't have native RPM support, but
it generates fscked up files. Took me another fifteen minutes to figure
out how, exactly, it works. I still don't know why I need to tar zxvf
two different files.
I suppose I could ask somebody about what exactly goes into creating an
RPM file, but that's bordering on Useful Information, so I'll bite my
tongue and not say anything at all. But fsck, it's a stupid system.
'specially when www.rpm.org calls itself the world's best package manager.
Is it harder to produce a tarball than an RPM?
Someone else on this thread has pointed out that this is part of the
Microsoftification of Linux, and that this is probably a Bad Thing<tm>
because the standard is now lower -- you don't actually have to know how
to do a kernel recompile in order to get your Linux distribution working
perfectly. I got LARTed -- mildly, mind you -- on a local froup the other
day because I told somebody he'd have to recompile his kernel to enable IP
masquerading and firewalling, and somebody else came in and said, "Oh,
well, you don't have to do that under RedHat." I was dumbfounded. Has
RedHat lost their minds and decided to go with a Solaris approach of
loading stuff into the kernel at boot time?! (Possibly a request for
useful information -- I'm sorry.)
God! Makes me want to cry. I won't get into the "I was around when.." but
I remember when I installed some ancient version of SLS a number of years
ago, and that's probably why I refuse to use packages.
And now I realize that Enlightenment has consumed fully 20% of my disk
space. Time to rm -r the source directories and start hunting for the
places it has installed its crap, since I've just decided I no longer want
to put the effort into compiling it[2]. So much for that idea..
---
mike sugimoto, gmd/ss phl...@fumbling.com http://www.fumbling.com/
[1] Would someone please explain to me why, exactly, I need 18 libraries I
have *never* required before to build *one* piece of software? Is this
another part of the Microsoftification of Linux -- sure, the executable is
120kb, but hey, you forgot the 60MB worth of .DLLs..
[2] I suppose there's a reason why they recommend you grab the binaires
and the RPMs off the ftp site, but there's no way in hell I'm accepting
binaries when the source is available. I *like* compiling. I *like*
reading source code. I *like* making sure nobody's fscking with my system
without my knowledge, which might explain why I dislike RPM altogether..
Geoff Lane
phl...@islandnet.com (Mike Sugimoto) writes:
> And now I realize that Enlightenment has consumed fully 20% of my disk
> space. Time to rm -r the source directories and start hunting for the
> places it has installed its crap, since I've just decided I no longer want
> to put the effort into compiling it[2]. So much for that idea..
Other people here sometimes ask why i don't use CDE/KDE/Win98/NT etc when I
can essentially use what I wish and easily justify spending some money
upgrading the hardware[0] to run it/them...
(I've tried most of them except NT, but I sit less than 5 ft away for an NT
box and consider that a sufficient exposure - I can feel the NasTy rays as I
type.)
Basically it comes down to complexity; an old version of fvwm does far more
than I ever need - at home I use the bare-bones "wm" window manager and
sometimes wonder what I can cut out of that! I'm I totally out of my tree
in expecting that computers would get simpler over time[1]?
Linux used to be pure and clean but now you can't throw a brick without
hitting someone with a Redhat CD - maybe it's time to see what's over the
next hill[2].
[0] I think some people are actually afraid because I can work perfectly
happily with a 100MHz Pc with only 16M of memory and a 1G harddrive.
[1] Retorical question - those 64Mbytes of memory _must_ be filled with
check-list functionallity, it's the LAW.
[2] I actually quite like Redhat 4 (+fixes) but then I am brave and will use
cc on a daily basis.
--
Geoff. Lane. Manchester Computing
Complexity Sucks
Stefan Morrell
>
> The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
> system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
> years.
Because sysadmins appear godlike in action and competance[1] and
therefore others would wish to rise to such heady heights themselves.
Humph.. little do they know. In fact one of my cow-orkers is leaving
today. She has a nice little job doing apps support and some 'C' on the
side and today she leaves to be a trainee sysadmin somewhere else. Well
it's her funeral.
Cya
Stef
[1] To the lusers anyway
--
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
creeps in this petty pace from day to day
to the last syllable of recorded time.
smor...@dial.pipex.com
void
<smorrell@!spam.dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>She has a nice little job doing apps support and some 'C' on the
>side and today she leaves to be a trainee sysadmin somewhere else.
I parsed this initially as meaning that she went off to the bathroom to
snort lines every once in a while.
--
Insomniacally yours,
Peter da Silva
Geoff Lane <e9040...@swirl.mcc.ac.uk> wrote:
>[0] I think some people are actually afraid because I can work perfectly
>happily with a 100MHz Pc with only 16M of memory and a 1G harddrive.
50 MHz, but 32M of RAM and a total of 1.2 GB of diskage.
--
In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva <pe...@baileynm.com>
`-_-' "It takes 5 NT servers to offer the performance and availability
'U` of a single UNIX server" -- Network Computing, July 15 1998.
Eric The Read
> Of course, as long as I have everything I need, I don't normally take
> much notice of what they do, but sometimes I want to pack it all in
> finish up Osiris, the OS I started back in 1988.
Osiris, eh? You're consulting for the Grail Project, are you?[0]
-=Eric
[0] STR, and win... nothing, really; it's too easy.
Chris Johnson
> ra...@typhoon.xnet.com (Heather Garvey) writes:
> : [0] I play a sysadmin, sadly enough. It's a Pern-themed place, so
> : it's kind of fun "recovering lost technology".[1]
> : [1] I designed a client-server network *in the game*. Sad, I know.
> : [2] Noramlly, I would tell him to piss off (or quit answering his
> : pages), but in the game theme, I'm his boss/instructor and
> : am *supposed* to be a mentor.
> So basically you are in hell ?
I don't know, but she's _scaring_ me O_O
Jinx_tigr
(aka Chris Johnson)
Jonathan Guthrie
> Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> wrote:
> >Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
> >distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
> >I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
> >Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
> >crapware you're trying to distribute.
> Next time I get drunk and cranky I will treat you all to the Extended Dance
> Remix Rant of why Linux distributions in general, and Red Hat in
> particular, is a Bad Thing because it has lowered the Bar To Entry to the
> point where the clueless can clamber aboard.
I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree about this one.
Those distributions have saved me endless hours finding and downloading
and rawriting and figuring out how to install package A so I can install
package B. (I started with kernel V0.11, have have about 3 dozen floppies
formatted with minix format because that was the only file format Linux
understood way back than. I don't miss those days at all.)
I don't have any problem with clueless newbies or wannabies or whatever
installing the same system I do. Frankly, anything that people choose
because it works better sounds like a winner to me. I do get mildly
annoyed when they claim that they're somehow part of some inner circle
just because they've figured out how to put an install disk in drive A:
and reboot. If ranting about those people every once in a while is the
price I pay for an (otherwise) inexpensive system that works, then so
be it.
If you want to go someplace that isn't touristy, then try Plan9 or
GNU. Shoot, even FreeBSD is far enough off the beaten path to not
attract lots of the clueless. Or, you can roll your own. (There's
a place around here that sells 486 computers, sans monitor, for $59 and
I've been thinking about getting one to do just that. All my current
systems are busy working.) However, if your purpose is to run a system
that not everyone is running, you shouldn't complain about the
inconveniences associated with using software that not everyone is
running.
Well, actually, come to think of it, you have as much right to complain
about that as I have of complaining about all the wannabies who run what
I choose. Such is life. I'll put up with your rants, if you put up with
mine.
Jake Riddoch
>In article <6ra74q$1ah$1...@news.hal-pc.org>,
>Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> wrote:
>>Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
>>distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
>>I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
>>Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
>>crapware you're trying to distribute.
How about commercial software? They're not likely to give out sources
for that, are they? At this point, RPM's are a valid way of
distributing packages provided there are alternative methods of
installation or a way to get RPM on your system.
> And have you noticed how there are many fewer
>SRPMs than RPMs?
Just get the damn tar.gz file if you want to compile a program.
Richard Letts
> Next time I get drunk and cranky I will treat you all to the Extended Dance
> Remix Rant of why Linux distributions in general, and Red Hat in
> particular, is a Bad Thing because it has lowered the Bar To Entry to the
> point where the clueless can clamber aboard.
This machine started out as redhat, now it's so patched up that I can
no-longer use RPM, becuase it says things like:
# rpm --install --verbose some-package-2.5.1-1.i386.rpm
failed dependencies:
/usr/bin/perl5 is needed by some-package-2.5.1-1.i386.rpm
# which perl5
/usr/bin/perl5
at this point I have to compile everything myself and so will diverge from
the True PATH
RjL
Adam J. Thornton
Jake Riddoch <ja...@larien.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>How about commercial software? They're not likely to give out sources
>for that, are they? At this point, RPM's are a valid way of
>distributing packages provided there are alternative methods of
>installation or a way to get RPM on your system.
If it's a binary-only release, sure. Maybe it sometime even makes sense
>> And have you noticed how there are many fewer
>>SRPMs than RPMs?
>Just get the damn tar.gz file if you want to compile a program.
Which ISN'T THERE. That's my POINT.
Some people--even ones releasing *free* software--have taken to releasing it
ONLY as rpm binaries. If I *can* get the tarball, I *will*.
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| I suppose I could ask somebody about what exactly goes into creating an
| RPM file, but that's bordering on Useful Information, so I'll bite my
It's a compressed cpio file (cpio fits on floppies better) with a fancy header.
You can use rpm2cpio that should have been built at the same time as rpm, or
use Emacs to search for gzip's magic number and delete everything up to that
point.
Or use Alien to convert it to a .tgz.
| RedHat lost their minds and decided to go with a Solaris approach of
| loading stuff into the kernel at boot time?! (Possibly a request for
| useful information -- I'm sorry.)
+--->8
Yes. And as someone who has to administer several hundred of these beasts,
all different, I'm glad for it --- compile 'em all and let modprobe sort it
out :-)
J. Eric Townsend
> Right now, he has me helping debug his code and he can't
There's your first problem. You're HELPING him.[1]
> [2] Noramlly, I would tell him to piss off (or quit answering his
> pages), but in the game theme, I'm his boss/instructor and
> am *supposed* to be a mentor.
As a boss and mentor, I'd still say 'RTFM'.[2]
[1] for free.
[2] not for free.
--
J. Eric Townsend jet at goonsquad.spies.com http://www.spies.com/jet
Socialist Gun Control: The Government buys guns for everyone.
Jenny With the Axe
>Computers give you what you put into them. Give them quality components
>and a nice place to stay, and they'll be happy. Unlike some people I
>know[1]. -rt
>
>[1] I hate women.
Wouldn't you be rather surprised if a woman gave you what you put into
her?
--
Jenny With the Axe (and the Temper) http://www.algonet.se/~jenny-h/
Goddess of delusions
Jenny With the Axe
>The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
>system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
>years.
It's a combination of sadism, masochism and megalomania. I like seeing
people cower before me.
Jonathan Guthrie
> >Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> wrote:
> >>Actually, this is becoming one of my pet peeves. Some software is being
> >>distributed ONLY in RPM files. I don't mind software coming in RPM files,
> >>I only care when I can't get a tarball or a zip file (or RAR or whatever
> >>Debian---my preferred distribution---uses) then I don't want whatever
> >>crapware you're trying to distribute.
> How about commercial software? They're not likely to give out sources
> for that, are they? At this point, RPM's are a valid way of
> distributing packages provided there are alternative methods of
> installation or a way to get RPM on your system.
Who said anything about sources? I'm complaining about the way the files
are packaged, not about what's in them. I've got a number of tarballs
that contain nothing but binaries and documentation. While I understand
the people who insist on building everything themselves, I'm not one of
them. (Although I could quite quickly come to be one of those people,
given enough disk space.)
Of course, I've tried to use the foreign package interface with Debian
(I think it's called "alien" or some such) and it makes more of a hash
of the system than you would believe. A matter of differing assumptions,
I believe.
> Adam J. Thornton <ad...@princeton.edu> spake unto the Monastery thusly:
> > And have you noticed how there are many fewer
> >SRPMs than RPMs?
> Just get the damn tar.gz file if you want to compile a program.
But if they don't DISTRIBUTE a compressed tar, how can we do that? That
is, after all, what MY rant was about.
Matt McLeod
Clinton Pierce <fu...@ameritech.deleteme.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Aug 1998 22:52:50 +0100, Jake Riddoch
><ja...@larien.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>thusly:
>>>Here they are, classical RedHat Linux sysadmin wannabees. CS
>>>students.
>>
>>Oh, those... "I have RedHat linux at home, therefore I'm a sysadmin".
>>
>
>I do the tech interviews for UNIX Admins at the consulting company I
>work for. Listing "Linux" under OS experience is a red flag that this
>is a luser in disguise. The interview usually goes something like
>this:
Hm. As someone currently looking for a new job[1][2], and who includes
Linux as one of the OSes I've worked with, I have to ask: what
about when they've got other UNIX-like OSes listed?
>BIFH[0][1]: Oh, I see you have _Linux_ as the UNIX OS you
> administered.
>Supplicant: Linux is Bitchin Cool. RedHat rocks.
I'd be more likely to say "Linux sucks, RedHat sucks even more".
> BIFH: I see. What revision Kernel do you run?
>Supplicant: Kernel? It's RedHat 5.1.
If given a choice: 1.2.13.
If not given a choice (i.e., at work right now): 2.0.33, but
only 'cause they're damn RedHat systems and I've "not allowed"
to change anything (yes, I *am* the sysadmin, but the boss
likes RH5.0, and reboots are Not Allowed).
> BIFH: Yes, well. How would I determine which kernel
> modules are loaded? (looking for lsmod)
>Supplicant: With "rpm"!
Bah. cat /proc/modules
> BIFH: I see. Have you got a metal ballpoint? [2]
> See that wallsocket over there? Take the refill out
> of the pen and poke in into the wallsocket.
>Supplicant: But it's live!
> B1FH: Would I really make you do it if it were live?
If I'd given those answers, then of course it's live.
Matt
[1] When the cheques start bouncing, it's time to bail...
[2] Biggest problem I'm having is not a lot of corporate
experience - it's all been small ISPs and stuff like that.
The recruitment types you have to get past to actually talk
to someone with half a clue aren't interested if you don't
have the corporate experience.
Ryan Tucker
>Wouldn't you be rather surprised if a woman gave you what you put into
>her?
Let's not get into my fetishes here. :-P -rt
Charlie Stross
on 17 Aug 1998 21:25:46 GMT,Jonathan Guthrie
the supplicant <jgut...@brokersys.com> implored:
>I'm a little disappointed, but not particularly surprised, at the
>attitude taken by the Smart RedHat People[tm] and their minions.
It's an inevitable side-effect of popularity.
Hmm.
I am about to coin a Law: Stross's Law:
The cluefullness of any operating system's user base is inversely
proportional to its popularity.
Red Hat in particular (and Linux in general) is just now showing the
kind of growth that used to make BYTE run an editorial every year for
the whole of the 1980's saying "198.: is this the year of UNIX?".[1] An
unfortunate corollary of this is that more and more lusers are learning
about it, and treating it like (shudder) Windows.
Mea culpa; I'm even encouraging this trend. (Just turning in a
three-chunk mega-feature on Linux for Computer Shopper[3] to run in a
month or two.)
On the other hand, look on the bright side. They may be dolts, but
at least they're not part of the Microsoft borg.
>Of
>course, as long as I have everything I need, I don't normally take
>much notice of what they do, but sometimes I want to pack it all in
>finish up Osiris, the OS I started back in 1988.
This is a Good Idea. Let a thousand blowers floom, and all that.[4]
-- Charlie "waiting for the Hurd" Stross
[1] Funny that finally now, in what probably _is_ the year of UNIX[2],
Byte ain't around to run that editorial any more.
[2] In the philosophical sense, Linux being the bastard offspring thereof.
[3] The UK rag, not the US one, which is entirely different and owned
by someone other than Felix "you will never amount to much, my boy"
Dennis.
[4] Prop. Mairman Chao, 1961. [5]
[5] Just in case you haven't got it, my lord is a shoving lepard.
Charlie Stross
the supplicant <ric...@illuin.demon.co.uk> implored:
>This machine started out as redhat, now it's so patched up that I can
>no-longer use RPM, becuase it says things like:
># rpm --install --verbose some-package-2.5.1-1.i386.rpm
>failed dependencies:
> /usr/bin/perl5 is needed by some-package-2.5.1-1.i386.rpm
># which perl5
>/usr/bin/perl5
Ahem.
<UI>
--force and --nodeps are you friends.
</UI>
But when in doubt, make -j.
-- Charlie
Derry Hamilton
> But if they don't DISTRIBUTE a compressed tar, how can we do that? That
> is, after all, what MY rant was about.
After rpm buggered up my news system installing INN, I have given up
installing from rpms, if I can get the source, I make it myself, else I
use rpm2cpio and take a look-see what it is up to before it decides to
overwrite things.
Derry Hamilton ras...@tardis.ed.ac.uk
/********************************************************************
* I think your cats need tuning - according to a couple of quick *
* measurements on a recently calibrated reference cat, the dominant *
* frequency of a correctly adjusted cat should be 12Hz +/-20%. *
* ===Lionel Lauer on a.s.r=== *
*********************************************************************/
Jonathan Guthrie
> Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> writes:
> >The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
> >system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
> >years.
> It's a combination of sadism, masochism and megalomania. I like seeing
> people cower before me.
That's why you (might) want to stay a sysadmin, but it cannot possibly
explain the wannabes. I guess I should have asked why anyone would want
to be a wannabe.
Rodger Donaldson
>Some people--even ones releasing *free* software--have taken to releasing it
>ONLY as rpm binaries. If I *can* get the tarball, I *will*.
For some exceedingly small value of free, obviously. Can't say I've run
into any, myself.
--
Rodger Donaldson rod...@ihug.co.nz
"Forgive us if we bite your head off; we were led to assume you weren't
using it in the first place"
--Jim Allenspach, in comp.lang.perl.misc
Alex Priem
>They love distributions. They love the idea that they should not
>ever compile anything. make(1) is the sacred, and, therefore,
>forbidden command from them, let alone cc(1). Just asked them if
>they know ed. No, they're not. And one of them told me, "only
>sick people use ed". Maybe it's correct, we all are sick. But
>if you're not sick enough, why sysadmin?
Distributions suck. But trying to compile foo.tgz and finding out half
an hour later that you need libXyech.so. When you try to get libXyech.so
in working condition, you notice that it depends on a prehistoric
version of some other library. After a short ftp session that's also fixed.
After fixing the mistery of `where are our X11 includes hanging out today',
and some other broken assumptions of zut.tar.Z, you end up with a valid
binary. Too bad that it doesn't work when you type ./foo, because it
expects some initialization scripts in /usr/local/share/foo.
OK, make install. Then you find out that foo isn't useful at all,
because it segfaults every 5 minutes, but that's only because the
fscking author had no clue to start with. As if I hadn't noticed.
Yeah, compiling is great. And xmkmf is your friend.
Alex
Joel Herda
rtucker+rep...@katan.ttgcitn.com wrote:
>I can't even manage to kill myself, which is probably a good indication
>that I'm not a people person. -rt (who even got up to 117mph on a gravel
>road and locked his wheels and didn't even go near a ditch)
Try a motorcycle next time, same place, same speed. For added effect,
leave the helmet and leathers at home. It'll work, I guar-an-tee it!
joel
--
Joel Herda sysadmin-biker-skum 1983 Suzuki GS1100GL
jjo...@tiac.net DoD#2053 1995 Neon Sport Coupe DOHC
remove the leading j from my address to have email get through
Derry Hamilton
Which IME leads to responses like
cannot install package foo:
package foo is already installed
cannot update package foo:
package foo is already installed
cannot uninstall package foo:
package foo is already installed
rpm is not my friend, ever. I believe it to suck only slightly less than
M$ DNS server.
qua...@crystal.ntu.edu.au
wrote:
>J. Eric Townsend <j...@spies.com> wrote:
>>ra...@typhoon.xnet.com (Heather Garvey) writes:
>>
>>> [2] Noramlly, I would tell him to piss off (or quit answering his
>>> pages), but in the game theme, I'm his boss/instructor and
>>> am *supposed* to be a mentor.
>>
>>As a boss and mentor, I'd still say 'RTFM'.[2]
>
> Oh, I do. It's the only thing keeping me from killing him.
>I think after the fourth or fifth "Jesus H. Christ on a pony, kid,
>are you even READING the list of required arguments for that function?
>Go back and read it again, goddammit!", he's catching on.
>
> -- Heather the Surly
;me.transparent=1 is your friend...
Oh sorry you said MUSH didnt you, does it have an @hide ???
Rob (MOO coder)
+***/.a\****/tu\****/u/*| ,-*/\ | This space | header +
|$$/b/\d\$$/n/\.\$$/a/$$| / \ | left blank | munged |
|%/o/%%\a\/@/%%\e\/./%%%| \_.-\_/ | for future | look |
+/r/####\ms/####\du/####| v | expansion. | left +
Lionel Lauer
>> BIFH: I see. Have you got a metal ballpoint? [2]
>> See that wallsocket over there? Take the refill out
>> of the pen and poke in into the wallsocket.
>>Supplicant: But it's live!
>> B1FH: Would I really make you do it if it were live?
>
>If I'd given those answers, then of course it's live.
I, OTOH, would palm the insert while pretending[0] to insert it in the
socket several times, then return it to the interviewer in the hope of
seeing them try it for themselves.[1]
>[1] When the cheques start bouncing, it's time to bail...
Oooooh yeah - that's why I left my first computer industry job.
>[2] Biggest problem I'm having is not a lot of corporate
> experience - it's all been small ISPs and stuff like that.
> The recruitment types you have to get past to actually talk
> to someone with half a clue aren't interested if you don't
> have the corporate experience.
That's interesting, I wasn't aware of that particular bit of recruiting
luserdom - the one I've usually had to contend with is the 'no formal
qualifications' kiss of death.
[0] Or I actually would insert it, while being very careful that no part
of my body was grounded in any way - power points aren't that dangerous
if you know what you're doing.
[1] AKA the Wile E. Coyote effect.
Lionel.
--
Grep bait: qmail, Archimedes Plutonium, turkey, Kibo, Wollmann, Meow.
Grep bait de jour: Theresa Willis, Terri
Perna condita delenda est. Agree? - See http://www.ybecker.net/pink/
"Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
Olivier Galibert
>Yeah, compiling is great. And xmkmf is your friend.
With a friend like that I don't need enemies.
OG.
Christopher Michael Cooney
:
: [0] Or I actually would insert it, while being very careful that no part
: of my body was grounded in any way - power points aren't that dangerous
: if you know what you're doing.
unless this was, say, 3 phase 240 disguised as a normal plug...
--
coo...@rpi.edu Comp. Science, Blah Blah Sparc MIPS Blah
Walking through the basement of Fuller Labs wearing futuristic body
armor and pushing a variable-geometry motorcycle raises eyebrows.
Telling students that this is the true power of UNIX doesn't help. -UF
Lionel Lauer
that:
>Lionel Lauer (long...@newsguy.com) wrote:
>:
>: [0] Or I actually would insert it, while being very careful that no part
>: of my body was grounded in any way - power points aren't that dangerous
>: if you know what you're doing.
>:
>
>unless this was, say, 3 phase 240 disguised as a normal plug...
Nope, that wouldn't make any appreciable difference.
The key to electrical safety if understanding that you have to have a
voltage differential for current to flow.
Kirrily 'Skud' Robert
>Kibo informs me that m...@natasha.apana.org.au (Matt McLeod) stated that:
>
>> experience - it's all been small ISPs and stuff like that.
>> The recruitment types you have to get past to actually talk
>> to someone with half a clue aren't interested if you don't
>> have the corporate experience.
>
>That's interesting, I wasn't aware of that particular bit of recruiting
>luserdom - the one I've usually had to contend with is the 'no formal
>qualifications' kiss of death.
I've found that it depends *lots* on the agency and how you approach
them. I've been known to ring up agencies even when I'm not looking
for anything, just have a chat to them to see if they're clued, then
email them a brief "here's what I'm looking for" sort of thing, with
an explanation that if they feel like headhunting me for ludicrous
amounts of money, they should feel free to call.
I do get calls. Not many, but a few. They seem to keep you on the
books forever at some of those places. And, as is often the case,
if they offer you something you don't want (like, something with a
dress code or NT or whatever) can get a nice little glow from saying
no. And not grovelling to them.
UI? Well, it depends whether you consider being headhunted for
ludicrous amounts of money and then refusing the offer to be an aid
to recovery or not.
Anyway, that's *my* way of dealing with the soul-stealing,
mind-numbing luserdom of the recruitment industry.
K.
--
Kirrily "Skud" Robert (sk...@monash.edu.au)
http://w3.cc.monash.edu.au/~krobert/ (geeky stuff, weird stuff, etc)
I'd rather that a bigot mistake me for a lesbian than that a lesbian
mistake me for a bigot. -- Tovah Hollander
void
On 19 Aug 1998 22:58:35 +0200, Alex Priem <al...@sci.kun.nl> wrote:
>
>Distributions suck. But trying to compile foo.tgz and finding out half
>an hour later that you need libXyech.so. When you try to get libXyech.so
>in working condition, you notice that it depends on a prehistoric
>version of some other library. After a short ftp session that's also fixed.
>After fixing the mistery of `where are our X11 includes hanging out today',
>and some other broken assumptions of zut.tar.Z, you end up with a valid
>binary. Too bad that it doesn't work when you type ./foo, because it
>expects some initialization scripts in /usr/local/share/foo.
>OK, make install. Then you find out that foo isn't useful at all,
>because it segfaults every 5 minutes, but that's only because the
>fscking author had no clue to start with. As if I hadn't noticed.
>
>Yeah, compiling is great. And xmkmf is your friend.
>
>Alex
>
--
Ben
looking for admin/security work
Rebecca Ore
> On Wed, 19 Aug 1998, Charlie Stross wrote:
>
> >
> > <UI>
> > --force and --nodeps are you friends.
> > </UI>
> >
> Which IME leads to responses like
> cannot install package foo:
> package foo is already installed
>
> cannot update package foo:
> package foo is already installed
>
> cannot uninstall package foo:
> package foo is already installed
>
> rpm is not my friend, ever. I believe it to suck only slightly less than
> M$ DNS server.
Try handpicking out the files and then querying. RPM
generally goes, "Oh, it's really not here, is is?"
Try --replacefiles and --replacepkgs
Try rpm on the command line (Glint is broken anyway in RH 5.1).
(And reinstalling works, too).
--
Rebecca Ore
RH 4.1, 4.2, 4.1/4.2 hybrid, 5.1 user
Matt McLeod
Rodger Donaldson <rod...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>On 18 Aug 1998 21:35:50 GMT, Adam J. Thornton <ad...@princeton.edu> wrote:
>
>>Some people--even ones releasing *free* software--have taken to releasing it
>>ONLY as rpm binaries. If I *can* get the tarball, I *will*.
>
>For some exceedingly small value of free, obviously. Can't say I've run
>into any, myself.
I can only think of one (a user accounting tool). But since it probably
uses some Linuxisms anyway, and I'm not putting Linux on anything that
it might otherwise be useful on, it doesn't bother me all that much.
Matt
--
Matt McLeod <m...@attila.apana.org.au>
Proto-BOFH This has nothing to do with my boss.
APANA/Hunter Regional Co-ordinator And it isn't APANA policy, either.
http://attila.apana.org.au/~mjm/ My homepage, if you can be bothered.
Matt McLeod
Lionel Lauer <long...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>Kibo informs me that m...@natasha.apana.org.au (Matt McLeod) stated that:
>>Clinton Pierce <fu...@ameritech.deleteme.net> wrote:
>
>>> BIFH: I see. Have you got a metal ballpoint? [2]
>>> See that wallsocket over there? Take the refill out
>>> of the pen and poke in into the wallsocket.
>>>Supplicant: But it's live!
>>> B1FH: Would I really make you do it if it were live?
>>
>>If I'd given those answers, then of course it's live.
>
>I, OTOH, would palm the insert while pretending[0] to insert it in the
>socket several times, then return it to the interviewer in the hope of
>seeing them try it for themselves.[1]
I just wouldn't have given the answers that lead to the request.
Not as entertaining, I grant you, but more conducive to scoring the gig.
>>[1] When the cheques start bouncing, it's time to bail...
>
>Oooooh yeah - that's why I left my first computer industry job.
As an added bonus, I'm not entirely sure exactly *who* I work
for. It's as though the boss is playing musical corporate
structures.
>>[2] Biggest problem I'm having is not a lot of corporate
>> experience - it's all been small ISPs and stuff like that.
>> The recruitment types you have to get past to actually talk
>> to someone with half a clue aren't interested if you don't
>> have the corporate experience.
>
>That's interesting, I wasn't aware of that particular bit of recruiting
>luserdom - the one I've usually had to contend with is the 'no formal
>qualifications' kiss of death.
I get that one sometimes, too. But the "no corporate experience" thing
seems to be a bigger problem for me now (amazing how once one company
takes a punt on you and it pays off, the formal quals thing starts to
go away).
Recruiters can be a real PITA, but there doesn't seem to be a lot
of choice. Unless you're really well-known and have offers from
all over the place, you can't really avoid the buggers.
Simon Cozens
: > <complaints>
: >
: > rpm is not my friend, ever. I believe it to suck only slightly less than
: > M$ DNS server.
:
: Try handpicking out the files and then querying. RPM
: generally goes, "Oh, it's really not here, is is?"
To be fair to rpm, you *can* get SRPMS and run rpm2tgz thus turning
them into something sensible. I'd say the program sucks more than
the format.
: (And reinstalling works, too).
And of course, you need to reinstall Linux every time the system
crashes. Didn't you know? :-)
--
No .sig
Joe Zeff
>L2> They have a reasonable configuration in the RPM already. And
> things that can't be configured from a config file, shouldn't
> be configured at all.[3]
In a very small way, he has a fraction of a point there. It should be
possible to configure everything with external files. It would be
Real Nice if you never had to recompile to configure a program. Alas,
just because it would be nice, doesn't mean it's true. You might be
able to give him a clue by pointing out that if he could have
configured without compiling, you wouldn't have given him detailed
instructions on *how* to recompile. Then, ask him if he thinks you
know what you're doing. After he admits that you do[1] ask him if he
thinks you would have told him to recompile if it weren't needed and
watch him try to weasel out of what he's done.
[1]What to do if he doesn't think you know what you're doing is
obvious. Only the size of the LART need be considered and I'll let
you decide that for yourself.[2]
[2]Footnote included for numeric consistancy.
[3]Legacy footnote, not supported. See your vendor for details.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Zeff Earthlink Network
jo...@earthlink.net Senior Support Joat
(800) 395-8410
Computers work in weird and marvelous ways, their
wonders to avoid performing.
------------------------------------------------------------
Peter da Silva
Vadim Vygonets <va...@trilok.cs.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>Correct. "How do you (((|un)install|configure) software|configure
>network interfaces|set netmask|tell the machine about
>nameservers|do most of the admin stuff) on RedHat?" -- "With
>rpm". Perfectly correct. Reminds me of the phrase "Click the
>Start button", for some uninvestigated reason.
This sounds like "set" in VMS...
--
In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva <pe...@baileynm.com>
`-_-' "It takes 5 NT servers to offer the performance and availability
'U` of a single UNIX server" -- Network Computing, July 15 1998.
Felix Kasza
> (And reinstalling works, too).
I thought that was something quite unnecessary on non-MS OSes?
--
Cheers,
Felix.
Joe Zeff
>Has
>RedHat lost their minds and decided to go with a Solaris approach of
>loading stuff into the kernel at boot time?! (Possibly a request for
>useful information -- I'm sorry.)
I haven't done it yet, but you can have it load various modules at
boot instead of rebuilding the kernal. Is this a good thing or a bad?
That depends on your viewpoint. Frankly, it looks a lot easier to me.
Just because you had to rebuild to make changes twenty five years ago
doesn't mean that everybody still has to do it, even if easier ways
have been developed. I do, however, think that you should know how to
rebuild the kernal and get it installed if you want to call yourself a
sysadmin. Even if you never plan to do things the hard way again,
doesn't mean that you shouldn't try it at least once, as a learning
experience. Just as soon as I have time, I'll probably do just that
at home.
Matthew Crosby
Joe Zeff <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>phl...@islandnet.com (Mike Sugimoto) wrote:
>
>>Has
>>RedHat lost their minds and decided to go with a Solaris approach of
>>loading stuff into the kernel at boot time?! (Possibly a request for
>>useful information -- I'm sorry.)
>
>I haven't done it yet, but you can have it load various modules at
>boot instead of rebuilding the kernal. Is this a good thing or a bad?
>That depends on your viewpoint. Frankly, it looks a lot easier to me.
Speaking as the person who has to maintain the 147 different SunOS kernels
in my current company, I consider loadable modules a godsend.
(Yes, that number is real. Yes, I realise there shouldn't be nearly that
many. Flames > /dev/null).
--
Matthew Crosby cro...@cs.colorado.edu
Disclaimer: It was in another country, and besides, the wench is dead.
Rebecca Ore
> Rebecca,
>
> > (And reinstalling works, too).
>
> I thought that was something quite unnecessary on non-MS OSes?
>
Friends have now convinced me of the importance of vi and not
rebooting.
Single user mode has been a friend of late.
(And where is the cache of NOC NOC jokes?)
--
Rebecca Ore
Felix Kasza
> Friends have now convinced me of the importance of vi [...]
Friends don't let friends use vi. If you are not permitted to run
anything but vi, switch it to ex mode, at least. (Unless some
luser-friendly cretin amputated that code, in which case you might as
well use notepad.)
--
Cheers,
Felix.
Itai Zukerman
>>RedHat lost their minds and decided to go with a Solaris approach of
>>loading stuff into the kernel at boot time?! (Possibly a request for
>>useful information -- I'm sorry.)
is this about loadable modules? if so, let me point out another plus:
on low-memory machines (4mb, say) it really can help to only load
things when you need them (ppp, sound). a page is, i believe, 8kb.
also, i could be wrong but i believe these pages, like all kernel
memory, aren't swapped out.
[zukermai@vis58 hforth]$ /sbin/lsmod
Module Pages Used by
sound 21 2 (autoclean)
isofs 5 1 (autoclean)
nls_iso8859_1 1 2 (autoclean)
nls_cp437 1 1 (autoclean)
vfat 4 1 (autoclean)
fat 6 [vfat] 1 (autoclean)
nls 1 [isofs nls_iso8859_1 nls_cp437 vfat fat] 0 (autoclean)
Jake Riddoch
thusly:
>Jake Riddoch (ja...@larien.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>Well, every system comes in a sort of distribution, but sometimes
>it's better to re-compile some programs than to install them from
>a package.
*nod* sendmail and bind being two obvious ones, since they both have so
many security problems. Plus we have tcp_wrappers for security which
don't ship with Solaris.
Using RPM's allows you to keep _fairly_ up to date, but you need to be
able to compile stuff from time to time. Under Solaris/many other
unices, you _have_ to be able to compile stuff to keep up to date; you
don't get that many pkgadd versions of software around, let alone up to
date ones.
>> I know of ed, but have never bothered learning it. I suppose I really
>> should for hard core problem fixing, but I get by fine with vi most of
>> the time.
>
>What do you do if the system can't boot multi-user, because
>something is wrong with rc files, and /usr is NFS-mounted, and
>therefore not accessible at the time?
Hence I get by with vi most of the time. This is indeed why I really
should learn how to use ed to edit files.
>> Apart from which, there is the performance advantage of compiled in
>> options. This is what ./configure --enable-option is for!!
>
>Well, in this one, you have _no_ "./configure". You chamge
>several options in Makefile by hand.
Been there, done that. Apache 1.2.x did that and I still do edit
src/Configuration rather than learn the new configure options. Or be
really lazy and just:
# cp apache_1.3.0/src/Configuration apache_1.3.1/src/Configuation
OBBloodyWorkmen: Had one of the lecturers complaining about some error
on his screen; can't communicate with server. Check connection to hub,
ok, check from PC in our room, no connection to server.
Fearing the worst, I go to the machine room to see if it's abend'ed or
rebooted. Nope, it's fine, but complaining about no link. Turn round
to look at switch/routers, no power to the two switches or the router.
Check trip switches. Fine. Servers ok (on UPS). *ponder*. Finally
click that the workmen had been in the fuse box next to our room.
Turns out they had just pulled the fuse without any warning, killing the
power to half the machine room. Servers are still up, but can't
communicate to anywhere because they all feed into the switches which
have no power... Bleh.
Of course, the UPS (which had been around 100% battery power) kicks out
before power comes back; if I'd known that was going to happen, I'd
have shut the fsckers down properly[1]. Wasn't too bad. Because they
hadn't been able to talk to anyone for 15 minutes, their disks were
pretty much in sync, including the 30GB in the main Storage Array.
Fcking workmen.
1/ Yup, our servers don't listen to the UPS[2]
2/ Yet. I intend to get this changed.
--
Jake Riddoch http://www.larien.demon.co.uk/
"Windows has detected that a gnat has farted near your computer. Press any key
to reboot." - Simon Oke in the scary devil monastery
Paul Tomblin
>Friends don't let friends use vi. If you are not permitted to run
>anything but vi, switch it to ex mode, at least. (Unless some
WARNING! EDITOR ADVOCACY WARS AHEAD! PROCEED WITH CAUTION!
Feh! And FEH! again. I've been using vi as my main editor for 12 years, and
my fingers are well and truely trained. Nobody believes me, but vi is the
editor I find best to use when netlag is keeping me typing a page ahead of
what is echoing.
--
Paul Tomblin, ptom...@xcski.com.
"An appointment is an engagement to see someone, while a morningstar is a
large lump of metal used for viciously crushing skulls. It is important not
to confuse the two, isn't it, Mr. --?" - Terry Pratchett
Itai Zukerman
>Distributions suck.
but packages are great. lately i've been making debian packages of
the sources i'd ordinarily recompile for every machine (it's not so
much the compilation as putting the support files in the right
places[1]). when the new laptop comes around, i don't have to spend x
hours tracking down compilation flags. and my compilation notes are
kept with the package docs.
my point is that you may hate distributions in general, but package
systems can be incredibly useful, especially if you have to maintain
many mostly-identical machines.
[1] "make install"? not really. and software that hides installation
things in code run (only) during make install is a real bitch. i want
to know _exactly_ what's going on during installation.
-itai
Peter van Hooft
>In alt.sysadmin.recovery Jenny With the Axe <jen...@algonet.se> wrote:
>> Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> writes:
>> >The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
>> >system administrators? Lots of people do, but it has puzzled me for
>> >years.
>> It's a combination of sadism, masochism and megalomania. I like seeing
>> people cower before me.
>That's why you (might) want to stay a sysadmin, but it cannot possibly
>explain the wannabes. I guess I should have asked why anyone would want
>to be a wannabe.
Perhaps they want to _be_ because they like to think they think?
peter
Felix Kasza
> WARNING! EDITOR ADVOCACY WARS AHEAD! PROCEED WITH CAUTION!
Why?
I think we all have that behind us ... (yeah, right). It was just too
good an opportunity to pass up.
Besides, if you knew what I prefer to call my editor, you'd sue me for a
keyboard plus three days' worth compensation for being ill.
--
Cheers,
Felix.
Georg Bauer
Sugimoto) wrote:
>I remember when I installed some ancient version of SLS a number of years
>ago, and that's probably why I refuse to use packages.
Funny. My first distribution was a SLS and I nowadays use debian. And I
like packages. Install first from the packages, look how to configure -
and if I need to change compile-time options, I install the source and
patch the debian-changes into it, change the options like I need them and
create my own package to install. Even with tarballs it is often easier to
create just a stub-package for debian (especially if they are built using
autoconfig, they are very easy to wrap into a .deb). Makes maintenance
much easier.
bye, Georg
Georg Bauer
(void) wrote:
>Sometimes I get the feeling from certain Linux people that they don't just
>want to displace Microsoft, they want to *re*place it. Grr.
[full quote of previous article snipped]
Is this full quote after your (short) answer really needed? This reminds
me of some really nasty habits of Outlook-lusers ... I _know_ that you can
do better with slrn, I use it myself from time to time.
Georg Bauer
<jen...@algonet.se> wrote:
>Wouldn't you be rather surprised if a woman gave you what you put into
>her?
Wouldn't that hurt?
Rebecca Ore
You've been talking to someone who tried to find out why she
couldn't load xemacs when in single user mode.
--
Rebecca Ore
Larry Herzog Jr.
> Paul Tomblin <ptom...@canoe.xcski.com> wrote:
> > In a previous article, fel...@mvps.org (Felix Kasza) said:
> >>Friends don't let friends use vi. If you are not permitted to run
> >>anything but vi, switch it to ex mode, at least. (Unless some
>
> > WARNING! EDITOR ADVOCACY WARS AHEAD! PROCEED WITH CAUTION!
>
> > Feh! And FEH! again. I've been using vi as my main editor for 12 years, and
> > my fingers are well and truely trained. Nobody believes me, but vi is the
> > editor I find best to use when netlag is keeping me typing a page ahead of
> > what is echoing.
>
> I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
> news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
Almost??
_______
Larry Herzog Jr. "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit,
but in humility consider others better than
her...@Uhhh.Org yourselves." -- Philippians 2:3
Alan J Rosenthal
the entire network, not luser linux weenies.
jo...@earthlink.net (Joe Zeff) writes:
>va...@trilok.cs.huji.ac.il (Vadim Vygonets) wrote:
>>L2> They have a reasonable configuration in the RPM already. And
>> things that can't be configured from a config file, shouldn't
>> be configured at all.[3]
>
>In a very small way, he has a fraction of a point there. It should be
>possible to configure everything with external files. It would be
>Real Nice if you never had to recompile to configure a program.
Vomit!
This way lies microsoft and extreme bloatware.
"It should be possible to turn sendmail into trn by editing external files."
This attitude also yields the kind of system where a config file says where
other config files are, because the authors just didn't grok the fact that
eventually, SOME path name has to be compiled in.
I also loathe the way that everyone thinks it's k00l to put files in different
fscking places all over the filesystem. Use standard directory names.
Don't add the ability to configure this in other config files, compile it in.
Jonathan Guthrie <jgut...@brokersys.com> writes:
>The one thing I'm curious about, though. Why do people want to be
>system administrators?
They don't want to be system administrators. They want to be 3l33t hAck3rz
with the r00t password.
phl...@islandnet.com (Mike Sugimoto) writes:
>I suppose I could ask somebody about what exactly goes into creating an
>RPM file,
Semen.
So be very careful when you handle them, and wash your hands afterwards.
Doug McNaught
> You've been talking to someone who tried to find out why she
> couldn't load xemacs when in single user mode.
Hmmm, I don't see why you couldn't do that, unless you forgot to
mount the requisite partition first... Have to try it.
On this subject, I recently realized something that shows I am Truly
Beyond Hope. I can use both vi (fairly effectively) and Xemacs (very
effectively) without getting confused. I wondered what was keeping me
sane, until I realized that I always run Xemacs as an X window, and vi
in xterms or at machine consoles (Linux or *spit* UnixWare).
Apparently the visual difference acts as a selector for my fingers'
'editor wiring'. If I try to run emacs -nw in an xterm, I end up
filling the file with i's and x's and such. So I don't do that
anymore ;)
-Doug
PS Anybody thinking about an ASR-Atlanta? I just hired a fellow
Monastery inmate (hi Randall!) so I know there's at least two of us in
this town...
--
Doug McNaught do...@tc.net
Senior Network Engineer dmcn...@premtec.com
Premiere Communications http://www.premtec.com
Robert Crawford
>Paul Tomblin <ptom...@canoe.xcski.com> wrote:
>> Feh! And FEH! again. I've been using vi as my main editor for 12 years, and
>> my fingers are well and truely trained. Nobody believes me, but vi is the
>> editor I find best to use when netlag is keeping me typing a page ahead of
>> what is echoing.
>I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
>news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
I once wrote a lab report using vi, formatting it with *roff.
I _truly_ needed recovery even then, and I was still in school.
Microsoft: Why don't you just go away?
Clinton Pierce
wrote:>>I do the tech interviews for UNIX Admins at the consulting company I
>>work for. Listing "Linux" under OS experience is a red flag that this
>>is a luser in disguise. The interview usually goes something like
>>this:
>
>Hm. As someone currently looking for a new job[1][2], and who includes
>Linux as one of the OSes I've worked with, I have to ask: what
>about when they've got other UNIX-like OSes listed?
It's only a red flag. Happily overlooked when warranted.
It's when the recruiters send over a resume for a Windows person, who
lists "Linux", and who's looking for a (somewhat) higher paying job
adminning UNIX boxes--THAT's when the B1FH takes over...
Delete the "deleteme" from my home address for E-Mail purposes
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Clinton A. Pierce | "If you rush a Miracle Man, | http://www. |
| cpie...@ford.com | you get rotten miracles" | dcicorp.com/ |
| |--Miracle Max, The Princess Bride| ~clintp |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
DNRC: "Grand Inquisitor of Out At 5 Doctrine" 06/96
j...@lasser.org
> [5] Just in case you haven't got it, my lord is a shoving lepard.
Argh... Nord and Bert flashbacks... I didn't know that was possible.
But oh so enjoyable :-)
--
Jon Lasser (410)383-7962 http://www.tux.org/~lasser/
Work: j...@umbc.edu Home: j...@lasser.org
. . . and the walls became the world all around . . . (Maurice Sendak)
j...@lasser.org
> Using RPM's allows you to keep _fairly_ up to date, but you need to be
> able to compile stuff from time to time. Under Solaris/many other
> unices, you _have_ to be able to compile stuff to keep up to date; you
> don't get that many pkgadd versions of software around, let alone up to
> date ones.
Unless you work for a University, where literally hundreds of boxes need
to be maintained, or have access to packages built by such institutions,
and don't mind IRIX or Solaris packages with the school name in every
single fscking package name.
And, finally, a rational middle ground on the RedHat Sucks / RedHat
Rules thread. Like it or not, RedHat makes it possible for me to easily
maintain scads of lab machines and keep students' personal linux boxes
from becoming threats to our network security. Well, from becoming more
of a threat than their simply having computers. Of course, using RedHat
doesn't mean I don't have to occasionally write wrappers to install
packages and then put things in the right place[0], or from occasionally
having to install software by hand, but it does give me a chance (after
I built the package, anyway) to make sure that freeciv is installed all
over our campus.
Jon
[0] For software where we don't get the source.[1]
[1] Like AFS.[2]
[2] Where we have a license for the source, but getting the Linux
version is Simply More Trouble Than It's Worth. (SMTTIW, my new acronym
of the week (NAOTW))
j...@lasser.org
>>In a very small way, he has a fraction of a point there. It should be
>>possible to configure everything with external files. It would be
>>Real Nice if you never had to recompile to configure a program.
> Vomit!
> This way lies microsoft and extreme bloatware.
> "It should be possible to turn sendmail into trn by editing external files."
> This attitude also yields the kind of system where a config file says where
> other config files are, because the authors just didn't grok the fact that
> eventually, SOME path name has to be compiled in.
Nope. That's what environment variables are for.
HTH. HAND.[0]
Jon
[0] I figured out the HTH part really early on in my a.s.r career, but
it took a few months to sink in what HAND was. Early guesses ranged from
"Horny Admin Needs Date" to "Huge Assholes Never Die." But now I'm
older. Though perhaps not too wiser.
Kevin Schoedel
<ja...@larien.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Turns out they had just pulled the fuse without any warning, killing the
> power to half the machine room. Servers are still up, but can't
> communicate to anywhere because they all feed into the switches which
> have no power... Bleh.
>
> Of course, the UPS (which had been around 100% battery power) kicks out
> before power comes back;
"Before power comes back"?
Why not just turn the power back on straight away? Problem solved.
> Fcking workmen.
Why not just turn the power back on straight away? Problem solved.
--
Kevin Schoedel
fpub...@xj.vtf.arg
Jenny With the Axe
>That's why you (might) want to stay a sysadmin, but it cannot possibly
>explain the wannabes. I guess I should have asked why anyone would want
>to be a wannabe.
Nevermind. I think I'll give up sysadminning and become a salesdroid.
Then I can dream up all sorts of impossible things and force the
sysadmins to live with them.
--
Jenny With the Axe (and the Temper) http://www.algonet.se/~jenny-h/
Goddess of delusions
Christian Bauernfeind
ptom...@canoe.xcski.com (Paul Tomblin) writes:
>
> Feh! And FEH! again. I've been using vi as my main editor for 12 years, and
> my fingers are well and truely trained. Nobody believes me, but vi is the
....and along comes POSUX and tell me I can take my finger habits and shove
them. Return to col 0 on undo. Undo the last undo instead of redoing the
last command before that on redo\footnotemark. Who do they think they are?
Christian
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}
\footnotetext{For illustration, ``dduk.'' deletes the line above the cursor
in vi. It deletes the current line in the abomination they deliver with
AIX4.x. Unless I'm already far enough down the hill to get the example wrong.}
--
Christian Bauernfeind
Not speaking for Siemens
Not even working for IBM
e-mail: v2ba...@fishkill.ibm.com
Christian Bauernfeind
j...@lasser.org writes:
>
> [0] I figured out the HTH part really early on in my a.s.r career, but
> it took a few months to sink in what HAND was. Early guesses ranged from
> "Horny Admin Needs Date" to "Huge Assholes Never Die." But now I'm
> older. Though perhaps not too wiser.
About the same here. LART I looked up. HTH and HAND I figured out.
STR dropped on me last week.
I would say I can correctly decode, say, about a third of the more
common acronyms now....
Christian
Carl Jacobs
> > I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and
> > write
> > news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
>
Yeah, well, she wrote the paper. It was thato whole "research" thing
that was the almost.
<g,d&r>, because she knows where I sit...
--
Carl Jacobs - Software Engineer by title, SysAdmin by fait accompli
Opinions expressed are not those of Raytheon Systems Company.
cjacobs at fallschurch.esys.com, hyde at rtfm.netset.com (munged)
"I Just hate having that hole and not using it!" -Rebecca
Joe Zeff
>
>I, OTOH, would palm the insert while pretending[0] to insert it in the
>socket several times, then return it to the interviewer in the hope of
>seeing them try it for themselves.[1]
>
What do you know? No more buwwets!
>[1] AKA the Wile E. Coyote effect.
>
What do you know? One buwwet weft.
I know, I know, one buwwet weft![2]
[0]Somebody else's footnote.
[2]Not Wile E. Coyote, but right studio and it fits the idea
juuuuuuuuuuust right.[3]
[3]Another Warner Bro's reference for you to spot.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Zeff Earthlink Network
jo...@earthlink.net Senior Support Joat
(800) 395-8410
Computers work in weird and marvelous ways, their
wonders to avoid performing.
------------------------------------------------------------
D. Joseph Creighton
}jec...@rtfm.netset.com (Rebecca Gray) writes:
}>I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
}>news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
}
}and hyperlinks, for my sins). Of course, I'm only about 60 pages
}into it so far -- when it comes to printing out a final product and
}wanting proper pagination, I may be forced to export it to a word
}processer or come up with a fairly amazing perl script to deal with
}it. But I'll cross that bridge...
Why not use lyn^c
Oops. Pardon. UI.
}--
}
}-- (random sig)
}Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
} The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the
Of the... what? Damn, I hate cliff-hangers.
ObASR: I'm using vi right now.
- Joe
--
46 72 69 6E 6B 20 72 75 6C 65 73 21 -- Homer^3
http://www.cs.umanitoba.ca/~djc/
D. Joseph Creighton [ESTP] | Programmer Analyst, Database Technologies, IST
Joe_Cr...@UManitoba.CA | University of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB, Canada, eh?
Arthur Hagen
In article <6rfe9r$3ag$1...@wn5.sci.kun.nl>, al...@sci.kun.nl writes:
> Distributions suck. But trying to compile foo.tgz and finding out half
> an hour later that you need libXyech.so. When you try to get libXyech.so
> in working condition, you notice that it depends on a prehistoric
> version of some other library. After a short ftp session that's also fixed.
> After fixing the mistery of `where are our X11 includes hanging out today',
> and some other broken assumptions of zut.tar.Z, you end up with a valid
> binary. Too bad that it doesn't work when you type ./foo, because it
> expects some initialization scripts in /usr/local/share/foo.
> OK, make install. Then you find out that foo isn't useful at all,
> because it segfaults every 5 minutes, but that's only because the
> fscking author had no clue to start with. As if I hadn't noticed.
>
> Yeah, compiling is great. And xmkmf is your friend.
*Applause* Afther having fought tcl8.1/tk8.1 for hours now, I can
only agree. ./configure with stupid hardcoded unoverridable linux-
specific settings that don't work sucks more than my Hoover.
In specific, I do *not* want libraries in /usr/local/lib and the ones
already there are NOT compatible for linking and should not even
be searched.
I *know* how to edit my imake settings to work for my system, and
that's why I always prefer a good Imakefile and xmkmf.
GNU autoconfugger is made for people without a clue, where the
system has to decide for them what they want and how they want to
be raped.
Regards,
--
*Art
Arthur Hagen
> [1] "make install"? not really. and software that hides installation
> things in code run (only) during make install is a real bitch. i want
> to know _exactly_ what's going on during installation.
"make -n install" is your friend.
--
*Art
Shaw Terwilliger
> *Applause* Afther having fought tcl8.1/tk8.1 for hours now, I can
> only agree. ./configure with stupid hardcoded unoverridable linux-
> specific settings that don't work sucks more than my Hoover.
> In specific, I do *not* want libraries in /usr/local/lib and the ones
> already there are NOT compatible for linking and should not even
> be searched.
./configure --prefix= --exec-prefix= ?
./configure --help is your friend.
If it doesn't obey those parameters, it's not GNU configure. I also
doubt the official Tcl/Tk packages would include unoverridable
Linux settings. Last I heard, they were still maintained out of
Sun. Tcl/Tk suck anyway (ObSoftwareSucks).
--
Shaw Terwilliger (ten.tenecnavda@giwt)
Laurence Doering
Joe Zeff <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>long...@newsguy.com (Lionel Lauer) wrote:
>
>>
>>I, OTOH, would palm the insert while pretending[0] to insert it in the
>>socket several times, then return it to the interviewer in the hope of
>>seeing them try it for themselves.[1]
>>
>
>What do you know? No more buwwets!
>
>>[1] AKA the Wile E. Coyote effect.
>>
>
>What do you know? One buwwet weft.
>
>I know, I know, one buwwet weft![2]
From one of the Chuck Jones hunting trilogy consisting of
"Rabbit Seasoning", "Rabbit Fire", and "Duck, Rabbit,
Duck".
I think it's from "Rabbit Fire", but the
dialog actually goes:
ELMER FUDD
Well, what do you know. One buwwet left.
BUGS BUNNY
[to Daffy, who has just shot himself while
peering down the barrel of Elmer's shotgun]
Hey, laughing boy...
DAFFY DUCK
[face blackened, beak awry]
I know. I KNOW!!!
ljd
"Ladies and gennelmen, the management wishes to announce
that we will be unable to continue wit' da showing of da
rest of dis picture. And, confiDENtially... the film
didn't exactly BREAK."
Jake Riddoch
>In the wise words of Alan J Rosenthal:
>> other config files are, because the authors just didn't grok the fact that
>> eventually, SOME path name has to be compiled in.
>
>Nope. That's what environment variables are for.
Or command line parameters, either of which can achieve the same effect.
Personally, I prefer command line parameters which lend themselves to
startup scripts better eg:
FOOCONFIG=/usr/local/foo/config
/usr/local/foo/bin/bar
vs:
/usr/local/foo/bin/bar -f /usr/local/foo/config
That said, if you're calling the application multiple times, an
environment variable only has to be set once.
I guess environment variables are better for common apps and command
line parameters are better for daemons.
Damn, that was almost UI *THWACK* Ouch!
--
Jake Riddoch http://www.larien.demon.co.uk/
"Windows has detected that a gnat has farted near your computer. Press any key
to reboot." - Simon Oke in the scary devil monastery
Jake Riddoch
thusly:
>which is certainly the case around here. If buildings engineering decides
>that your area is going to be blacked out, you are BLACKED OUT.
>Furrfu, what is this? All September, all the time?
Yes. While putting power back on might have been satisfying, it could
have been fatal for the workmen. Not a big deal, but would probably
cause more trouble than it was worth.
Jake Riddoch
>greater than NetSwear alone.
It's better than having to go round 100 lab machines to add a shortcut
to an app. It might not be brilliant, but it has some nice features.
I can only assume you had a bad experience with it...
Abigail
MCMXCIII in <URL: news:35dcb...@athena.netset.com>:
++
++ I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
++ news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
I do so too. (Ok, with vile, a vi-clone). Except that I did write several
research papers.
Abigail
--
perl -we 'print split /(?=(.*))/s => "Just another Perl Hacker\n";'
Abigail
in <URL: news:slrn6tpkso....@iac.net>:
++
++ I once wrote a lab report using vi, formatting it with *roff.
++ I _truly_ needed recovery even then, and I was still in school.
The first paper I had to write in university was *about* nroff, using
nroff.
I've never worked with *roff again.
Abigail
--
sub _'_{$_'_=~s/$a/$_/}map{$$_=$Z++}Y,a..z,A..X;*{($_::_=sprintf+q=%X==>"$A$Y".
"$b$r$T$u")=~s~0~O~g;map+_::_,U=>T=>L=>$Z;$_::_}=*_;sub _{print+/.*::(.*)/s}
*_'_=*{chr($b*$e)};*__=*{chr(1<<$e)};
_::_(r(e(k(c(a(H(__(l(r(e(P(__(r(e(h(t(o(n(a(__(t(us(J())))))))))))))))))))))))
Peter Gutmann
jec...@rtfm.netset.com (Rebecca Gray) writes:
>I believe you, Paul. I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
>news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
Stuart the Nice wrote his entire thesis in vi.
(I wrote mine using a Brief[0] clone. Would you belive that there are people
who write a thesis in MS Worm? I've heard horror stories of Worm taking over
half an hour to save a copy of a thesis to a floppy, that alone should be
enough to put anyone off using it for anything other than fax cover sheets).
Peter.
[0] A rather nice editor which takes advantage of the fact that most people
are going to be sitting at AT-style keyboards rather than the VT100's
which most editors assume by binding some sort of editing function to
every single key, so you can perform almost any basic editing function in
a single keystroke.
Georg Bauer
(Rebecca Gray) wrote:
>I use vi to code, edit files, write mail, and write
>news posts. I almost wrote a research paper under it, once.
Yup. Although I have to admit that I strayed from the true path and use
vim instead of naked vi. The syntax coloring is soooo nice. And for larger
papers: what's better than tex and vi together? I even wrote letters with
this combination in the past (although I don't use vi on my Mac, as I have
to admit - there are nicer editors available. But I do still use vi on
everything else, including MS-stuff).
bye, Georg
Rodger Donaldson
wrote:
>Using RPM's allows you to keep _fairly_ up to date, but you need to be
>able to compile stuff from time to time. Under Solaris/many other
>unices, you _have_ to be able to compile stuff to keep up to date; you
>don't get that many pkgadd versions of software around, let alone up to
>date ones.
The phrase "build your own" becomes important.
Packages, that is.
--
Rodger Donaldson rod...@ihug.co.nz
"It is not easy to become beautiful. It requires hard work, patience, and
attention to detail. It also takes a certain firmness of purpose. Beauty
is in the eye of the beholder, and it may be necessary from time to time
to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." -Miss Piggy
Rodger Donaldson
>I haven't done it yet, but you can have it load various modules at
>boot instead of rebuilding the kernal. Is this a good thing or a bad?
>That depends on your viewpoint.
My viewpoint? NI gets hosed. No duplicate types (or types that use the
same driver) come to hand.
I either: 1/ Bring the system down, replace the hardware, build a new kernel,
install it, reboot, and have a working system again.
2/ Build a honking great monolithic kernel with all the NI drivers I might
possibly want to use compiled in to start with. Replace the errant card,
reboot. "Inelegant" springs to mind, along with "waste of resources".
3/ Have built all the modules for NI's. When it fails, replace, and change
the modules aliased to eth0.
I know which *I* prefer, but then my time outside the office is precious to
me. YMMV.
(And this cannot be UI, because it is *too* trivial).
ObASR: Lusers who want me to fix their home systems. Full stop, I suppose,
but *especially* lusers, who, when told that I haven't spent enough time at
home and *want to get away from fixing people's stuff* assume that a bribe
of dinner is somehow enough.
Right. Try more along the lines of a few hundred dollars an hour and I
*might*, but I haven't been seeing enough of the Real World, and dinner
doesn't cut it.
--
Rodger Donaldson rod...@ihug.co.nz
"Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web
page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you
had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer,
another word processor, or another network." -- Tim Berners-Lee
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| Has anyone ever ported IBM's TEDIT to Unices?
+--->8
I preferred porting (n)vi to OS/2, myself. If you want the Unix equivalent
of TEDIT, try microemacs (XEDIT being Emacs in IBM's image). Or perhaps TECO.
--
brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] all...@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator [WAY too many hats] all...@ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering
carnegie mellon university (bsa@kf8nh is still valid.)
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| [1] Like AFS.[2]
| [2] Where we have a license for the source, but getting the Linux
| version is Simply More Trouble Than It's Worth. (SMTTIW, my new acronym
| of the week (NAOTW))
I let CS worry about the source, I just roll the binary package for ECE.
(Ulterior motive: as long as I haven't been exposed to AFS source I figure
there's no way I can get into trouble for working on Arla :-)
As to the rest: <UI TYPE=RedHat>autorpm</UI>
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| Robert Crawford (craw...@iac.net) wrote:
| > I once wrote a lab report using vi, formatting it with *roff.
| Vadik (yaright, there's also LaTeX...).
+--->8
(text formatter DSW?)
I wrote a largeish chunk of system documentation in raw TeX once. Note:
this does not mean "plain TeX" --- while I did rely on the initialization
of e.g. fonts (so I couldn't have used initex), I used only low-level TeX
operations. (Why? Mechanically translated from an earlier version done
with troff -mm, but troff was nonfunctional and -mm was even worse. Luckily
it wasn't very complex, so mechanical translation actually produced a
semi-sane result.)
Robert Crawford
>Robert Crawford (craw...@iac.net) wrote:
>> I once wrote a lab report using vi, formatting it with *roff.
>Is there any other way to do it?
>Vadik (yaright, there's also LaTeX...).
They wouldn't let us have TeX, and the only printers in the
EE lab were big, old line printers. I think I did a paper for a
junior-level writing course in 'roff, also. I remember getting a
_really_ strange look from that professor, because mine was the only
paper that didn't come out of a laser printer.
Microsoft: Why don't you just go away?
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| Linux settings. Last I heard, they were still maintained out of
| Sun. Tcl/Tk suck anyway (ObSoftwareSucks).
<UI TYPE=Tcl>Scriptics</UI>
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| "It should be possible to turn sendmail into trn by editing external files."
+--->8
(recalling Tower of Hanoi via sendmail.cf) Are you sure it isn't?
| I also loathe the way that everyone thinks it's k00l to put files in different
| fscking places all over the filesystem. Use standard directory names.
+--->8
s/everyone/FSSTND/
<soapbox>
I was and remain a dissenter. "Integrated" packages are a major pain in the
*ss. But I'm in the minority on that as far as FSSTND/FHS is concerned.
</soapbox>
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| j...@lasser.org spake unto the Monastery thusly:
| >In the wise words of Alan J Rosenthal:
| >> This attitude also yields the kind of system where a config file says where
| >> other config files are, because the authors just didn't grok the fact that
| >> eventually, SOME path name has to be compiled in.
| >
| >Nope. That's what environment variables are for.
|
| Or command line parameters, either of which can achieve the same effect.
Or, for the ultimate[1], consider what GNOME uses: run "gnome-config" and let
the shell sort it out.
[1] Ultimate *what*, I haven't decided yet.
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH
+-----
| Don't know about RPM, but I do know something about the deb files
| (Debian GNU[0]/Linux packages). But that's not always a good
| idea.
+--->8
I do know what goes into RPM.[1] Be afraid. Be very afraid.
| [0] They co-operate. So fsckking proud. Lignux.
+--->8
I find that both ironic and hypocritical, considering that a few years ago
the Linux community was rebuffed by the FSF because the Hurd was *the* GNU
OS. So now we have "GNU/Linux" aka "Lignux". Furrfu.