Re: [Fwd: Re: AKLUG server]

On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Damien Hull wrote:

> Thanks for clearing things up. We all have our own way of doing things.
> Nevaeh does what you want the way you want. There is nothing wrong with that.
> Most of my comments were aimed at the general Linux community and AKLUG.
>
> Using a distribution on the AKLUG server that only two or three people have
> ever seen could cause problems.
>
> 1. What does AKLUG do when things go wrong?
> 2. How does AKLUG get extra features added to the server?
> 3. What does AKLUG do if the person maintaining the AKLUG server
> isn't around?
>
> I believe questions like these need be asked.

My objections with these questions is that this is the kind of silliness
PHBs (excluding #3) asked in the late 90s as a reason to stay on MS. Those
kind of "support" questions didn't hold water then, and they definitely
don't hold water now. Even back then various tech pubs concluded that the
Linux support on usenet was typically far superior than commercial support.
And extra features? Build from source? You can even use most RPMs on
Nevaeh, if you had such a predilection.

#3 is relevant, but AKLUG has already historically gone through that with
every admin change. Every single one has blown away the previous distro and
used his own pet distro. I was one of them, AKLUG used to run Slack. I
blew away a RH box. So, with that historical perspective, is #3 really
pertinent?

> My comment about Mike having trouble installing software on Nevaeh proves my
> point. He is a long time Linux user and knows what he's doing. Even with all
> that experience he has to figure out the what, why, how of Nevaeh. I think we
> all go through this when using a new and or unfamiliar distribution. If Mike
> is going through this then what are the users/members of AKLUG going to do.
> We've never seen Nevaeh.

Mike (unfortunately for him) works for me, so I am intimately familiar with
his capabilities, Damien. I hired him because he is one of the most capable
admins available in the LUG. That said, he also is an example of what we're
doing wrong in training Linux admins. Mike knows a lot about Linux, but he
knew more about managing Red Hat then he knew about managing *Linux*. And
when they all use pretty much the exact same software that's damned silly.

After working with Mike for over a year, and Jon for almost a year, I'll
tell you this: these guys are rapidly developing into Linux Hacker &
Admin'ing studs. And why? Because they know more about what your distro
*isn't* telling you it's doing behind the scenes. In fact, at this point, if
we had a contest to see who could set up any random unfamiliar distro
quicker I'd wager they'd be in the top five in speed. They deserve a lot of
respect and credit for what they've accomplished in a short period of time.

Regardless, I'm going to put this as simply as possible: 90% of the
problems you guys are having aren't issues with Nevaeh, they're
package-specific issues that exist on all platforms. Preconfigured binary
packages can allow you to be ignorant of a lot of things, and that's why you
don't deal with it on other distros. I agree that Nevaeh doesn't tolerate
that way of thinking. It rarely makes assumptions for the admin, and when
it does it makes the most paranoid one. None of this, though, would stop
anyone who's very familiar with the package in question, and with any dev
environment.

As for that 10%: they're still not Nevaeh issues, they're *UNIX* issues,
and while my base philosophy is different from yours, any capable admin
should be able to figure out how to change them. It's not like I implement
a kernel root kit to enforce my way of thinking. It's all a simple matter
of editing a few text files. And they're all *standard* files.

Now, let's cut to the chase: I had nothing to do with Nevaeh on the server.
Personally, I'd be happy if you *didn't* use it. But Mike chose it because
he thought the process would teach everyone involved Linux internals. If
you guys have no interest in that, then I agree, wipe the box and use the
distro of your choice. If, however, you decide that that knowledge would be
useful (and I guarantee it will apply to your own distros as well), you
might want to stay the course. And when you get stumped, how about calling
in some help? I'm not volunteering to participate with this project, but
I'll be glad to give occasional help as needed.

> As for compiling from source all the time. Well, maybe. I'm in the process of
> building LFS. I'll let you know what I think when I'm done compiling.

Keep in mind that I'm recommending LFS strictly as an educational tool. By
no means am I recommending you run LFS as your distro of choice. I
certainly wouldn't.

         --Arthur Corliss
           Bolverk's Lair -- http://arthur.corlissfamily.org/
           Digital Mages -- http://www.digitalmages.com/
           "Live Free or Die, the Only Way to Live" -- NH State Motto
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Sun Dec 31 12:13:33 2006