[Zope] Better unix distrib for zope ??

Bill Anderson bill@immosys.com
04 Oct 2001 20:21:34 -0600

On Wed, 2001-10-03 at 07:39, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Juli=E1n Mu=F1oz Dom=EDnguez wrote:
> >
> > I am very_very_very bored with the "politics" beside the rpm based
> > distribuition (redhat, mandrake), which made impossible to to not be
> > updating anything at any minute of the day (distributions that creates =
> > kind of dependencies based on librairies, on anything).
> I think that you're probably seeing two problems intersecing, but not
> seeing the root cause.
> Constant updating on a server should only be done when there is a need fo=
> an upgrade based on required features or security.
> Upgrades ever few weeks based on security is pretty normal. And doing
> those upgrades (if they apply to your system) is the job of a system
> administrator. It's boring, but it's part of the job.
> Failure to do that will mean that your system will be vulnerable.
> As to the complexity of upgrades. I'd say that the RPM based distrubtions
> don't do major upgrades well (ie 6-7), and that minor number upgrades

It depends on who, and what. For example, I have a DEC-Alpha box that
received an install of 5.0RH, and has since been manually upgraded via
RPMs to 7.1+. no problems. :)

> aren't much better (6.1-6.2), but for thier normal security patches, it's
> often quite simple and conflict and dependency issues won't present
> themselves there.

The use of red-carpet helps eliminate many, many dependency issues.

> > I want to have a really stable server on the net (for running zope), wh=
> > I can upgrade without having to upgrade anything. I would like to have
> > your opinion about (all oriented to Zope):

Ok, you *might* get some definition of stable, but that will be
irrelevant, as your machine will likely be exploited, due to the failure
to upgrade.

> >
> > Debian
> > Suse

uses RPM.