[1952] in RedHat Linux List
Re: comment to RH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sheldon E. Newhouse)
Wed Oct 30 22:36:59 1996
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:34:39 -0500
From: "Sheldon E. Newhouse" <sen1@math.msu.edu>
To: redhat-list@redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961030213710.7440A-100000@helix.cs.cuc.edu>
Resent-From: redhat-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: redhat-list@redhat.com
Elliot Lee writes:
> On Wed, 30 Oct 1996, Sheldon E. Newhouse wrote:
>
> > So, it is a bit unfortunate that
> > 1. the old kernel upgrade info for putting 2.0.x on 3.0.3 has
> > disappeared from the RH web site.
>
> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/old-releases/redhat-3.0.3/i386/updates/2.0-kernel/
> has the files, and the info is still on the web site under
> /support/docs/rhl-intel/
>
> > 2. The 3.0.3 manual seems no longer available. (If it is available, I
> > haven't been able to find it.)
>
> It never was available for FTP/WWW.
>
> -- Elliot
OK, I apologize for not finding the new place for the kernel upgrade
page and I stand corrected.
But, I did not mean that the 3.0.3 manual should be available by
FTP/WWW. Why not still make it available for purchase?
If a new user wants to use 3.0.3, she is pretty well stuck at this point
for detailed documentation.
For instance, many users use Netscape (I know Red Baron, etc.), and
there are the libc corrections which have to be done under 4.0 to use
Netscape.
I, myself, have been worried about Netscape's lack of support for Linux
and have long looked for an adequate replacement. Maybe Red Baron will
be the replacement for me. I don't know yet.
(OK, the rest is long, and perhaps describes my motivation in sending
the original post. Anyone not interested in local stuff, stop now!)
My previous message was *not* for me. I have the whole Official Rh 3.0.3,
manual and all, and I am fine.
But, I just spent half an hour trying to help someone with a new
install of 3.0.3, and when I couldn't refer to the standard places with
the standard references (even for purchase), I found myself saying,
"Gee, it's too bad you can't get the old thing." I did not know where
to send the person, except to say, "Go back to the list. Think about
4.0, etc." I feel for the support person who finds that she needs a
working system, now, and has to fight with 4.0, etc.
A month or so ago, I did an ftp install of 3.0.3 (downloaded from RH)
which worked nearly flawlessly. Took half an hour of playing with the
installation disks, configuration, etc., three hours to download the
stuff (no interaction from me), and I had the thing up and running.
This was on an old 486, DX-2/50, 16 MB RAM, and was the first Linux box
installed and running in my Math Dept. Has been running for 25 or so
days, networked to a bunch of SUNS with no problem, runs Netscape, tex,
etc., no crashes, etc.
Except for the fact that the box is slow, old, etc., the user is happy
with it. He is currently waiting for an Ultra-sparc which hasn't arrived
yet. This dept has some 50 SUNS, 80 Macs, 60 PC's of various
varieties. I have been lobbying for months to get a few Linux boxes up
as cost effective alternatives. I feel that the ease with which I set
up the DX-2 above and its stability are strong catalysts toward that
end. It made some headway with the Professional Systems Manager (all
Solaris, Windows, Mac's, etc.).
I must admit that, what I have read recently about 4.0 makes me feel
that I am lucky that I did not try this with 4.0. The ftp installs have
not been reported as simple. I am afraid that it would have looked like
I was trying to get a 'buggy, immature setup' into a mainstream,
production environment.
I am patient with the development. I use the system at home, and if it
crashes, it is no big deal. But, the stability I got used to running
3.0.3 with the 2.0.x kernels and upgrades (weeks and weeks without
rebooting), led me to believe that I could get some good 'PR' for it at
work. So, back to my original post. Until the kinks are worked out, I
think that RH 3.0.3, manual and all should be available. Now, the ftp
stuff is available. What about the manual?
Sorry to go on and on. But, I am sure there are others out there with
similar concerns.
-sen
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
________________________________________________________________________
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Errata
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Tips http://www.redhat.com/mailing-lists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe redhat-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
