[Rule-list] Red Hat No Longer Supports 486

[Martin Stricker]

Colin Mattoon wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:53 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
> lproven at cix.co.uk (Liam Proven) wrote:<and I switched the order of
> things around>
> 
> Just some of my layman's opinions:
> 
> > Why RPM?
> > Why SysV init?

Because Red Hat Linux is based on RPM and System V. This project started
as a Red Hat Linux based one, and many of us want *Red Hat* Linux, not
Slackware or anything else. At least this is true for me. Furthermore,
you will find precompiled RPMs for Red Hat Linux for nearly any
software, which is especially important when dealing with proprietary
software. Thus it's a good idea to have a Red Hat Linux compatible
system.

> You cannot install binaries intended for Red Hat without supporting
> RPM (which Slackware does, but only to a limited degree). You can't
> manage RPMs -- in a Red Hat like manner -- without performing
> dependancy checking -- and Slackware needs help in that area.
> Finally, a lot of binaries intended for Red Hat won't run without
> adding some SysV scripts to Slackware's "BSD style" initialization
> scheme. This can be done manually, but it is difficult for
> inexperienced users.

Which is the reason I do not like the idea to use Slackware: Too
difficult to make compatible with Red Hat Linux.

> > > One reason is I believe Slackware is more viable is that, unlike
> > > Debian, Slackware has no package management system in place that
> > > performs dependancy checking.
> >
> > That is its greatest weakness, I think.
> 
> It is a distribution that has no existing package management system
> to get in the way when making modifications to mimic Red Hat's
> functionality. In this situation, a strength.

Correct. But counting in the other downsides, it might not be worth the
effort.

> Apt is at the heart of Debian's "Install once, run for ever," claim.
> A Debian system, once installed, never needs to be upgraded in the
> same sense that you upgrade a Red Hat, Slackware or SuSE system. You
> never perform another installation: you run "apt-get update" followed
> by "apt-get upgrade" and then (if there's a new release) "apt-get
> dist-upgrade." The machine seeks out a Debian mirror site (as found
> in /etc/apt/sources.list) and begins to replace packages as fast as
> it can download them from the Internet.
> 
> That is the standard (and the only practical) method to keep a Debian
> system up-to-date and secure. And when this is done, most of what has
> been done to make the system compatible with Red Hat will be broken
> -- because the base Debian packages you were using an hour ago aren't
> there anymore.
> 
> That's just the tip of the iceberg. There is no static target to
> develop Red Hat compatibility if Debian is used, because even the
> stable release is updated regularly. Most Debian systems are
> installed from the Internet.  Install Debian stable today and you'll
> get one set of packages. Perform an install tomorrow, and you'll
> likely get some different, updated, packages. Debian development is
> therefore, different than developing for other distributions. It is
> essential that Apt be permitted to handle all dependancy checking.

Well, this *could* be circumvented by 1) using apt-rpm as found on
http://freshrpms.net/ and 2) placing RULE mirrors instead of the Debian
ones into /etc/apt/sources.list. Again, I don't think it's worth the
effort.

Don't get me wrong, I have *nothing* against RULE subprojects dealing
with Slackware or Debian or any other distro! But I will stay with Red
Hat Linux. My proposal, if Red Hat decides to switch to i586 packages,
is to recompile the whole distro for i386 and make it available for
download. Of course, this might not be worth the effort as well... ;-))

Best regards,
Martin Stricker
-- 
Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/
Linux Migration Project: http://www.linux-migration.org/
Red Hat Linux 7.3 for low memory: http://www.rule-project.org/
Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/


_______________________________________________
Rule Project HOME PAGE:  http://www.rule-project.org/rule/
Original Rule Development Site http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/rule/
Original RULE mailing list: Rule-list at nongnu.org, hosted at http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rule-list