Thalis A. Kalfigopoulos wrote:
>>>
>>Well, if they fork then we can probably assume Redhat's database will be as
>>bad as their OS, so there's nothing to worry about ;-) *chuckle*
>>
>
> That's not true. If you started off with Ygdrassil linux then probably Rh seems too "soft", but they are the ones who
broughtthe crowds closer. And although technical expertise may be desired from "the followers", it is the numbers that
makethe difference and the people vote for u.s.e.r.f.r.i.e.n.d.l.y. I don't think Volkerding for example would be even
remotelyinterested in doing market research ;-) Besides Rh does more than just bundle a linux distribution together.
> Anyway, there are Rh members on the list. They know better what Rh has contributed (probably more than we know of)
In 1997 I bought a 6 CD set from Info Magic. RedHat was on disk one. I
installed it because it was on disk one... I had a machine running Suse
for a while because of ISDN support. I have installed various other
distribs in a VMware machine to test them.
There is nothing very wrong with RedHat. For a server it needs to be
hardened a little, but that is no big deal.
On the Power tools disk in that set there was Postgresql. Having read
the then non free licence of mySql I installed Postgresql.
Yes things really are that simple out here in user land.
Cheers
Tony Grant
--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html