APT, Yum and Red Carpet

[Bill Anderson]

On Thu, 2003-08-14 at 13:15, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Thursday 14 August 2003 10:45, Bill Anderson wrote:
> > If *you* are doing the support, why pay for RH support?
> > Why not take the publicly available SRPMs for AS, and build it
> > yourself? Then install that and provide the support you would
> > otherwise provide.
> >
> > Depending on *which* functionality in AS you need, this should work
> > quite well for you.
> 
> Because we provide systems to thousands of customers.  I can't imagine 
> the features that each and every one of them will need, so I'd have to 
> pull ALL the features of AS, and at that point, whats the use?

Maybe you are misunderstanding how the SRPMS system for AS works. The
only thin not included in AS SRPMS are the proprietary things RH
distributes. All the functionality you appear to be talking about (i.e.
"in RHL") is already there. So you build *one* distribution set based
off the AS SRPMS and use that.

At that point you have everything that AS has except the proprietary
stuff you'd have to pay to redistribute or the client needs to pay to
license *anyway*. Unless your clients need those (two, IIRC) pieces of
software (which you/they would need to license anyway), the SRPM-build
method meets those needs.

The point is you do it once and get what you are griping about. Since
you don't need support from RH but want AS, this appears to be an easy
solution for an RHCE. This is part of what providing support means. When
you take it on as opposed to letting RH do it, surely you expect to do
some additional work.

RHAS as currently *released* is based on 7.1-7.2 time frame RHL release,
not current RHL. So there *will* be a feature-set difference. Comparing
AS to the other capabilities released at the time, As has *more*
features --ones that were *added* to AS to make it AS, not the other way
around.

I am, however, very curious to see your list of "removed" features. Care
to share?



-- 
Bill Anderson
RHCE #807302597505773
bill at noreboots.com