-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jeff Bearer wrote:
>What is your opinion of using Red Hat's Apache and PHP binaries instead >of compiling from source? If Red hat is too specific for this list we >can expand it, but that is the binary that I'm interested in seeing how >it stacks up. >For those of you that are of the mindset that everyone should compile >everything from source, that's duly noted, but I'd rather hear from >people who weigh out the benefits of using one or the other and go with >the best choice. It depends. ;-) For system and user software, you'd spend your whole life compiling if you did it yourself. That's where rpm shines. (Except when Red Hat changes the #$(*%!& dependency structure mid-release.) For custom software and for server software that's exposed to the internet, I feel very strongly otherwise. Flexibility and security will always dictate that you build server software yourself, if those are your priorities. No matter how quickly the vendor responds to a vulnerability (and be assured that Red Hat's response times are among the best in the industry), there will always necessarily be more delay than if you patch your own. Cut out the middleman. In addition, in a heterogeneous shop, rpm is a lot less useful. Do you want to deal with packaging systems for Solaris, Red Hat, Debian, and OpenBSD? Or would you rather write a good script that will build or update all your server software for any of those platforms with just a flip of a variable or two? - -d - -- David Talkington PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/0xCA4C11AD.pgp -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQA/AwUBPLX4Br9BpdPKTBGtEQI5aQCguqEaP3mhsb61XFgMt4pxkUDrZQ8An1hh 4CPLcs6ag1S5iFZlprR2B4cf =Mcff -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
