[CentOS] Putting nat routing into place permanently? -- [OT]
and so it begins (the debate)
me at prestoncrawford.com
Fri Nov 4 21:04:59 UTC 2005
> [ I know I'm now going to hear from "select people" that I'm
> "flaunting my resume" again. Sigh. ]
Actually in this context this information is useful. And tone matters too,
remember. This has been a good thread, IMHO.
> It should be noted that Red Hat does not have inter-service
> dependency checking, unlike SuSE and others -- which can be a
> major issue. Red Hat is actually developing a next-gen
> service initialization engine, much like Solaris already has,
> while still being LSB/legacy SysVinit compatible.
That's interesting. I used SuSE for like 3 years. It always "felt" well
organized with respect to configuration scripts, but I wasn't sure if that
was me just being naive or what? I'm not systems guru, so I wasn't sure.
It just felt better. The last few RHEL releases, though, have been very
good in this respect.
> I'm sure I'm getting on the nerves of many. That's why it's
> probably best I discuss these things off-list, even if some
> value the information I can provide (they are typically the
Why do you always have to do this? Make it personal. No one is out to get
you. There's no witch hunt. I think this thread has been very productive
and interesting, personally. You're not getting on my nerves right now.
This conversation has been very instructive and interesting to me.
More information about the CentOS