Re: CCNA & SuSE 7.3
As someone who had to take a CCNA to keep my job, I would say that I agree with the last assessment of their worth. CCNA and all other related exams are merely a peek at whether you know the Cisco way etc. The test I took was very easy--in fact, nothing like I had been warned of or imagined :-O On a separate note I was considering Red Hat 7.2 this week, but someone here mentioned it had problems with ext3 etc., has anyone had any experience with 7.2; and the other question is: is SuSE 7.3 any good (don't know if I should ask this on a "SuSE" list ;-) Thanks! Paul
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 07:33:51PM -0500, Paul Munro wrote:
As someone who had to take a CCNA to keep my job, I would say that I agree with the last assessment of their worth. CCNA and all other related exams are merely a peek at whether you know the Cisco way etc. The test I took was very easy--in fact, nothing like I had been warned of or imagined :-O
The best of it is that you pay to become indoctrinated & then they try and get you to `upgrade' your qualification ie. the NT/2K & MS certification fiasco. Even the Jesuits didn't go that far!
On a separate note I was considering Red Hat 7.2 this week, but someone here mentioned it had problems with ext3 etc., has anyone had any experience with 7.2; and the other question is: is SuSE 7.3 any good
I patched my 2.2.19 kernel on my laptop for ext3 last week so I haven't had a chance to really assess it. FWIW, I haven't heard of any major problems with it & it's a fairly straightforward procedure if you're used to rolling your own kernel. I think if there were any major problems with it then RedHat wouldn't ship it, after all a solid file system is pretty critical. A search on Google for `ext3 2.2' or `ext3 2.4' will point you to the site where you can download the patch. I was thinking of RH7.2 but the only compelling reason for it was the journalled file system (just got new large HD) and XFree4 which would have been nice (too mean to download). I might hang on for a bit to let the 2.4 kernels settle down a bit before upgrading with a new distro. I always find that some stuff gets broken & needs fixing when I upgrade from a CD so I generally try and leave it as long as possible & just upgrade any vulnerabilities as needed.
(don't know if I should ask this on a "SuSE" list ;-)
Expect a posting from Roger doing his salesman bit ;-) Am I right in thinking that SuSe have gone for ReiserFS? -- Frank *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Boroughbridge. Tel: 01423 323019 --------- PGP keyID: 0xC0B341A3 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/ Now, let's SEND OUT for QUICHE!!
Thank heavens - I'm not a salesman ... SuSE 7.3 gives you reiserfs by default except on /boot But you can opt for ext3 if you prefer, also jfs. jfs on / is not recommended, however. On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Frank Shute wrote:
Expect a posting from Roger doing his salesman bit ;-)
Am I right in thinking that SuSe have gone for ReiserFS?
-- ------------------- Roger Whittaker SuSE Linux Ltd The Kinetic Centre Theobald Street Borehamwood Herts WD6 4PJ ------------------ 020 8387 1482 ------------------ roger@suse.co.uk ------------------
On Saturday 03 November 2001 12:33 am, Paul Munro wrote:
is SuSE 7.3 any good I've been playing with it for just over a week now and I'm very impressed indeed - especially with the new installation bits for RAID, LVM etc. Very slick!
Cheers -- Phil Driscoll
Folks, Anyone know why RedHat runs Star Office 5.1 *much* faster than an installation of SuSE on the same box? As a personal choice, I prefer SuSE over RedHat, so I would like to try to sort this out. Thanks in advance -- Matt --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume on Yahoo! Careers.
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Matt Johnson wrote:
Folks, Anyone know why RedHat runs Star Office 5.1 *much* faster than an installation of SuSE on the same box? As a personal choice, I prefer SuSE over RedHat, so I would like to try to sort this out.
What configuration differences between the two setups? e.g.: Are you using the same partition layout? Are you using the same file systems? Are you using the same hard drive optimisation parameters? What else do you have running on the machine? Are the contents of /lib and /usr/lib (and other lib folders) similar in size? Are the contents of /etc/ld.so.conf the same? etc., etc. Michael
What configuration differences between the two setups? e.g.:
Are you using the same partition layout?
I'm using the defaults for both RedHat and SuSE on a 9gb drive.
Are you using the same file systems?
Does this mean Ext, Journaling etc? I'm using whatever it set up for me by RedHat 7.2, SuSE 7.2
Are you using the same hard drive optimisation parameters?
Didn't know there were any :(
What else do you have running on the machine?
The SuSE install may have a few more service running, come to think of it. Samba, DHCPD. Those are what I have setup after the initial install.
Are the contents of /lib and /usr/lib (and other lib folders) similar in size?
Now this I can check, and I'll get back to you for advice if they turn out to be vastly different.
Are the contents of /etc/ld.so.conf the same?
What does this do?
etc., etc.
I'm lost on the etc etc, but I'll check out the things that you've outlined. It seems to be the case on a default Office/Desktop style install on maybe two or three boxes I've tried the distro's with. Has anyone experienced this? Thanks guys - much appreciated. -- Matt Yes, I'd love a copy of Star Office 6 beta. Sounds great. I'll email you off list. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Matt Johnson wrote:
What configuration differences between the two setups? e.g.: Are you using the same partition layout? I'm using the defaults for both RedHat and SuSE on a 9gb drive.
That doesn't mean a lot to me. What is the output of echo p | fdisk /dev/hda (run as root), and df -h (run as anyone)?
Are you using the same file systems? Does this mean Ext, Journaling etc? I'm using whatever it set up for me by RedHat 7.2, SuSE 7.2
Output of mount please.
Are you using the same hard drive optimisation parameters? Didn't know there were any :(
Output of hdparm -t -T -v /dev/hda (run as root) please.
What else do you have running on the machine? The SuSE install may have a few more service running, come to think of it. Samba, DHCPD. Those are what I have setup after the initial install.
Output of pstree please.
Are the contents of /lib and /usr/lib (and other lib folders) similar in size? Now this I can check, and I'll get back to you for advice if they turn out to be vastly different. Are the contents of /etc/ld.so.conf the same? What does this do?
See the ld.so(8) manpage. Michael
Hi all How fast does Star Office run on Mandrake ? I for one would be interested to see a table comparing the various advantages and disadvantages of the three versions. Has anyone - or any magazine - done this ? Regards, Grahame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Grahame Leon-Smith, Chairman of Trustees Tel +44-1932-874066 Fax +44-1932-874068 FREE COMPUTERS FOR EDUCATION Registered Charity No. 1059116 PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT < http://www.free-computers.org> and for further information just send a blank email to: < mailto:free-computers-news-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -----Original Message----- From: Matt Johnson [mailto:johnsonmlw@yahoo.com] Sent: 04 November 2001 11:23 To: SuSe Subject: [suse-linux-uk-schools] SuSE 7.2 and RedHat 7.2 Folks, Anyone know why RedHat runs Star Office 5.1 *much* faster than an installation of SuSE on the same box? As a personal choice, I prefer SuSE over RedHat, so I would like to try to sort this out. Thanks in advance -- Matt ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume on Yahoo! Careers.
On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Grahame Leon-Smith at Free Computers wrote:
How fast does Star Office run on Mandrake ? I for one would be interested to see a table comparing the various advantages and disadvantages of the three versions. Has anyone - or any magazine - done this ?
I'm not sure that it's actually a meaningful question. I can't speak for the other distros, but I know that there is no such thing as a "default" Mandrake installation. Michael
On Saturday 03 November 2001 12:33 am, Paul Munro wrote: [snip]
On a separate note I was considering Red Hat 7.2 this week, but someone here mentioned it had problems with ext3 etc., has anyone had any experience with 7.2; and the other question is: is SuSE 7.3 any good (don't know if I should ask this on a "SuSE" list ;-)
Thanks!
Paul
Hi Paul, There have been a number of posts about RH72 not printing, but these all seem to be with Epson Printers. There is also a big time problem with raid. The version on RH72 is linked against libraries in /usr/local/lib, which means that if /usr is not in / raid fails to start and everything goes TU. If /usr and / are the same partition then there's no problems. I believe that there is a fix now but as I don't run raid I've not looked into it. My personal experiences with 72 are pretty good - did clean install onto ext3 partitions. Had no problems yet, but not really hammered it. I've put it on a scratch machine and not had chance to break it yet. -- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000
participants (9)
-
Frank Shute -
Gary Stainburn -
Grahame Leon-Smith＠FreeComputers -
Matt Johnson -
Michael Brown -
Paul Munro -
Phil Driscoll -
Richard Ibbotson -
Roger Whittaker