[Linux-aus] Computerworld: Linux 'not ready' for enterprise IT

[David Lloyd]

Brent,

> If he is using Debian, an admirable Linux distro, I would tend to agree,
> but what about RedHat? Don;t get me wrong, Debian suits a variety of
> situations, but if you have a large set of servers to keep up, then the RH
> choicxe could be better in terms of workload for a sysadmin. That being
> said though, a good Debian centric admin would have a plan in place and
> apt-get at their disposal to address this so called issue.

I have had to downgrade a good number of RedHat servers or hold them back
because of RedHat's rather broken RPM dependency issues. People who say that
"you can't use [name some such distribution]" in the enterprise generally
:

 1) Have a religious love of another distribution
 2) Have no real knowledge of the distribution that's allegedly not good
    enough
 3) Have opened their mouth before thinking and/or put foot in such mouth

A person not familiar with a particular distribution is obviously going to
take longer than a person familiar with it. That's no indication of whether
a particular distribution is a "better choice in terms of workload" fo ra
sysadmin.

I postulate this null hypothesis:

 "That the Debian packaging system--with its configuration tools, priority
levels and in-built dependency handling--coupled with a tightly controlled,
peer reviewed, open source repository is flawed and likely to increase a
system administrator's workload."

Now, go prove it...


DSL



-- 
Microbits Linux Technician
 +61 8 8362 9220

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20030812/ca1ca331/attachment-0001.pgp