[wplug] I'm a Linux whimp (need kernel help)

[Chester R. Hosey]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 11:02 -0400, Vanco, Don wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: wplug-bounces+don.vanco=agilysys.com at wplug.org 
> >[mailto:wplug-bounces+don.vanco=agilysys.com at wplug.org] On 
> >Behalf Of Chester R. Hosey
> >I get the impression that Red Hat's position is that you shouldn't be
> >using a kernel other than theirs anyways. You should install their
> >package and be happy about it.
> 	Not as much Red Hat as the ISVs (although arguably no one tests
> an Enterprise-designed kernel like RH).  Case in point, Oracle checks
> for kernel checksum when requesting support in some cases.  
> 	If you can't grasp the logic behind this type of mandated
> package use there's likely little point in you running RHEL.

Whoa, there. I didn't say that I don't understand the preference for a
stable, known base upon which ISVs could base their tests -- I did say
(or at least I tried to imply) that it seems that Red Hat doesn't seem
to make it a priority to make kernel customization easier on users.

You seem to be leaping to conclusions that simply aren't true. It's
possible to provide a sensible set of default kernels (for example,
single-proc vs. SMP) for ISVs while making it easy for those who don't
mind an unsupported kernel to do things in a way that has minimal impact
on the remainder of the system. Saying that it's possible to be friendly
to DIYers does not lead to the conclusion that having a known kernel is
pointless -- it merely recognizes that not everyone has the same needs.

I invite you to find a single place where I have specifically spoken
poorly of Red Hat's intent to provide a base for ISV applications. Use
Google if you wish.

You'll find me posting as "Chet Hosey" or "Chester Hosey", occasionally
with my middle initial (which is R). With respect to Red Hat I've pretty
much contained my outbursts to this list, nahant-list, and a rather
cranky posting to rhn-users. You might also check the bug reports I've
filed at bugzilla.redhat.com. Please let me know where I've spoken ill
of Red Hat's ISV support. Happy hunting.

> > I agree with your comments regarding
> >Red Hat bloatware -- rhnsd takes a whopping 6 megabytes of RAM and as
> >far as I can tell all it does it periodically execute rhn_check (heaven
> >forbid it include some form of useful failure logging).
> 	If this is true there is something decidedly wrong with your
> box.  On a functional system it's barely a blip on the radar.  Once
> again, if you can't understand / appreciate what the RHN daemon is all
> aboot you likely don't need to be running RHEL.  Also note - it's not a
> required package - just pull it.

Upon further review, it does look like the resident size is under a meg.
That I misinterpreted, and I will rescind my statement. However, where
did I say that I can't understand or appreciate the purpose of rhnsd?

And if I "don't need to be running RHEL" if I "can't understand /
appreciate what the RHN daemon is all aboot", then why would I bother to
"just pull it" but continue using RHEL?

I'll admit when I'm wrong. It happens often enough that I don't
understand your desire to make claims about my understanding or position
that simply aren't true.

Chet