| |||||||||||||
Enterprise distributions suck and free software rulesEnterprise distributions suck and free software rulesPosted Mar 8, 2011 4:18 UTC (Tue) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198)In reply to: Enterprise distributions suck and free software rules by dlang Parent article: Enterprise distributions and free software
I have to say I really haven't had this problem, even when running triple digit numbers of systems I can't think of the last time i've had an RHEL update go bad, kernel or otherwise.
(Log in to post comments)
Enterprise distributions suck and free software rules Posted Mar 8, 2011 13:20 UTC (Tue) by SEJeff (subscriber, #51588) [Link]
RHEL 4.5 was a disaster of an upgrade:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=327591
Redhat took all of the upstream nfs client "fixes" that google primarily wrote and backported them to RHEL4. It did not go so well. The best thing I got out of working on this bug was ninja-level nfs debugging experience. See comment 8 for the secret sauce.
Enterprise distributions suck and free software rules Posted Mar 8, 2011 18:21 UTC (Tue) by ricwheeler (subscriber, #4980) [Link]
NFS client patches that google wrote?
Are you confusing google (no interest in NFS) with NetApp which employs Trond, the upstream client maintainer?
|
|||||||||||||