RH 7.1 installation on an IBM server with 3 scsi disks

[Andrew Kelly]

On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 18:23, Rick Stevens wrote:

> > Forgive me back, but please show me where I advocated any position
> > worthy of your wasting energy to bash it apart.
> 
> Uhm, I'm sorry to have sounded so "high and mighty".  I didn't intend to
> "bash it apart".  My phrasing could have been better and I appologize.

Thank you, Rick, I appreciate that.
If you haven't seen my previous posting, you have my apologies as well.
 
> > You said,
> > 	"Again, you can't have RAID5 on a single disk."
> > 
> > You were wrong, I disagreed with you and I offered a bit of information
> > as to why. Harmless as all that.
> 
> Well, true.  It's not a very useful thing to do.  As I had said, if it's
> for practice and getting familiar with the tools, fine.  It does not,
> however, do anything practical for you.
> 
> My "tirade" (should you wish to call it that) was invoked because we
> have a number of neophytes on the list and I get concerned when
> something like this gets put up, simply because I'm worried they'll set
> up a single-disk RAID and think that it will provide them the same
> "security" as a multi-disk RAID.

Ah. Thank you for the explanation.
Of course I can completely understand your motivation; my feelings are
roughly the same.


> And you should keep in mind that a lot of newbies watch this list (and
> others) and one should try not to lead them down a dead-end path.

Point taken.


> Again, it depends on how you read it.  I never--and I mean NEVER--intend
> to sound preachy or superior.  I am concerned because this list covers
> the gamut from rank newbies to old hands such as yourself.  Any
> information that could possibly cause a newbie to set themselves up for
> a bad toe-stubbing (such as a single-disk RAID) is of concern to me.

Well put, thank you.

> Once more, I appologize if you took offense.

Oddly enough, I didn't take offense, but thank you just the same.
There was a portion of your post to which I _could_ have taken offense,
had I chosen to, and my openly antangonistic response was a calculated
one, _just_in_case_ my offense was your intention.
I'm sorry, that's very obtuse, isn't it?

Here: 
I work at the secretariate of an international organisation; where the 
roughly 70 people in the building represent 30 or so different 
nationalalities. On a personal level I am accutely "allergic" to belittling
behaviour or anything that attempts to attack the worth and value of
any human being. But my work has made me minutely aware of the importance
of communication; specifically the need to take every precaution to
ensure that what is being communicated cannot possible be perceived
as rude or demeaning.
It is sometimes amazingly difficult, that is a fact.

My "offense" was rather quixotic, I'll give you that.
:-)

Looks like a case of "red flags passing in the night", non?

'nuff said.

Andy