DA Morgan wrote:
> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>
>> Fabrizio wrote:
>>
>>> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>>>
>>>> DA Morgan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> NetComrade wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you had a choice between RH and SuSe which one would you pick?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found a post that says that Oracle develops on SuSe, but given that
>>>>>> we will most likely be running Veritas on Linux, so far RH AS 3.0 is
>>>>>> the only choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I was curious if there is a comparison between the two
>>>>>> somewhere from an Oracle Admin perspective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> .......
>>>>>> We use Oracle 8.1.7.4 and 9.2.0.5 on Solaris 2.7 boxes
>>>>>> remove NSPAM to email
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know what Oracle develops on but there is no question that
>>>>> what the corporation runs itself on: Redhat.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But what would be the difference? The extras, the utilities,
>>>> the cream on top. Do you care? I don't.
>>>> The kernel would be (about) the same, apart from RH ES4 having
>>>> less patches that SuSE, but that is because SuSE was very fast
>>>> bringing out the latest kernel, whereas Red Hat waited for a
>>>> more mature version.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, a bit of a Linux adept would go and compile his/her
>>>> own kernel, wouldn't he?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You would lose support from both: Oracle and the Linux vendor. :(
>>>
>>
>> What - for creating my own kernel? Leaving out all these
>> obsolete options?
>
>
> Your question, I hope, is rhetorical.
No.
Even RH updates the kernel - I would then loose Oracle support?
Sounds like you buy a car ("GM advises to use Mobil"), and
get refused with the garage because you could only find Shell.
[Mobil ceased to exist some time ago in Europe]
I find it very strange, if true at all.
Just to clarify things; I am not altering source code,
I'm merely leaving out, and adding bits to the kernel, I want
in there. The "standard" kernel usually is far too big, and carries
too much options to my liking.
It's a security thing of mine.
--
Regards,
Frank van Bortel
Received on Wed Mar 02 2005 - 02:50:07 CST
