Quoting george ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On 3/16/04 6:34 PM, "Alan Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Chuck Yerkes wrote: > > > >> Why 7.2? (when 9.0 has been out forever). RedHat AS 2.0 is old and > >> is based on 7.2. 7.2 is from 2000 or so. > > > > Probably the same reason we use 7.2 at $orkplace - we have a > > standardised desktop distribution and not enough hours available to > > assess the impact of changing it drastically. > > > > (We're going to have to, as a lot of newer hardware simply isn't supported) > > > Gota spin in- > If the tool works, why change for the sake of change?
Security updates, performance improvements, management improvements, support, better tools. Change for the sake of change is bad. Stagnation for the sake of avoiding change is also bad. > We just bought SuSE 9.0. > Our other SuSE box is 7.* PPC > apple 8550 -still kickin > (Hardware change - [drive space & ram] from 8550) Yeah, I still have a working and running Apple //+ and Sun 3 here. The SPARC 10 is running a new OpenBSD, the Pentium/90 is running FreeBSD 5.2.1; the Athlon/900 is running Redhat 9. Unsecure software is a danger to all of us. If your company gets screwed, well that's not my problem. When your server attacks MINE, then it's my problem. And you don't want the feeling I had a dozen years ago when I got a call from CERT at the company I'd just started at telling us that a couple sites had been attacked from our computer (our big server that could NOT be easily rebuilt).
