| 1 |
On Saturday 24 August 2002 07:24, Gregg wrote: |
| 2 |
> Everyone keeps telling me how brave I am. I have to say, it doesnt seem |
| 3 |
> that way to me. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Sure, backup solutions are bought after the first real big crash, security |
| 6 |
measures are taken after one billion credit card numbers have been stolen |
| 7 |
etc. you get the picture. I have absolutely no idea what kind of customers |
| 8 |
you have but I wouldn't want to have my domain hosted on a system running on |
| 9 |
gcc 3.1 and all the latest packages. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
It's great for me at home but for serious computing it's just not reliable |
| 12 |
enough. I don't say it has to crash but I say I don't know enough working |
| 13 |
examples and theres no vendor to blame. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Sure you've had no real outage (due to gentoo), many ppl never had problems |
| 16 |
with xfs, I lost part of my homedir. On the other hand I never had problems |
| 17 |
with reiserfs even when it wasn't in the main kernel others lost everything. |
| 18 |
It's all about the risk. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Gcc 3.1 is not as tested as it should be (heck 3.1 is not even the "real" 3.x |
| 21 |
release) and some software is behaving strangely especially with athlon |
| 22 |
optimizations. Gentoo itself is known to have broken ebuilds etc. (I've yet |
| 23 |
to emerge one of those myself so far everything has worked). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
That's why we say brave. It's really great to have someone testing all this |
| 26 |
out but I just wouldn't test it on paying customers that don't know about all |
| 27 |
this. You do know about "production", "integration" and "testing" systems? :) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Alex |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety |
| 34 |
deserve neither liberty nor safety." |
| 35 |
Benjamin Franklin |
Archives