[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Subject: Re: Red Hat 9

On Saturday 29 March 2003 12:08, Guy Fraser uttered:
> Well, well, well. There you go, another pseudo system administrator. I
> have been supporting multiple unix platforms since 1984, and RH since
> 1995. The issues coming up now should be very relevant to RH. If I had
> to go to my boss and tell him that our low cost workstations were now
> going to cost $300 + $60x2 = $420 each every 2 years... the delayed fix
> for wine will seem like a bump in the road of my career.

Get your math right.  RHEL WS is $149/y.  Period.  You buy RHEL WS from Red 
Hat and download the isos, it's $149 a year.  So it's $300 every 2 years, so 
on and so forth.

Perhaps the bigger issue here is, why did you roll out a glibc upgrade w/out 
testing it first?  If it broke in your test environment, then you wouldn't 
have had any job problems, as you never would have rolled it out across the 
company.  Change control needs to happen, even if you're getting software 
updates from a trusted source.  I certainly didn't allow this glibc update to 
be rolled out untested.  Somewhere in my 3 years experience I picked that 
nugget up, so I would expect that in your... 19(?) years exp you would have 
picked it up too?  Perhaps it wasn't the move to Linux thats threatened your 
job, rather lack of competence to properly test a major software upgrade 
before you rolled it out.

And yes, had an admin rolled out a glibc in our environment, without properly 
testing it (IE run it through a change control board), and had it broken 
critical things, the admin would have been fired on the spot.

Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE
Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org)

Was I helpful?  Let others know:

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]