I was going to recommend roughly the same thing.

Don't use RPM's, install his tools manually.

When I did, I learned a lot of useful information about the internals of RedHat/CentOS (or any System V LUnix system for that matter).

And with all due respect, of course, it brings me back to the days when I was managing a qmail server and hanging around the qmail mailing list.

There was a lot of rudeness and snarkyness on that list. They aren't kind to those they consider fools.

DJB has his acolytes, much like Linus Torvalds does. I suspect that DJB's personality reflects the overall tone of DJB related online communities, much like Torvalds's personality affects groups like this. I have to say, DJB's software offerings are top rate.

Oh and the qmail server? My employer went Exchange. And slowly but surely, the IT there is becoming more Microsoft with Linux becoming more of an outlier. It's probably time for me to find another job. It's hard, because I've been with them a long time. === Al

--- On Fri, 9/5/08, RobertH roberth@abbacomm.net wrote:

From: RobertH roberth@abbacomm.net Subject: RE: [CentOS] DJB's daemontools package To: "'CentOS mailing list'" centos@centos.org Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 9:10 PM With all due respect...

Do any of you that gave advice on finding DJB software in rpm format use any of the software that you are giving advice on finding in rpm format or otherwise?

If you do use it, you can do better. :-)

If not, well... then you are talking out yer' rear ends.

It is best to go to the source and learn all you can, then make your own rpm or know what you are looking for in an rpm and specifically why.

http://cr.yp.to

and it wasn't the hard to google for

daemontools rpm

or the other packages in rpm format.

• rh

---

CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Sorry this is slightly off topic.

On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Jeff Kinz jkinz@kinz.org wrote:

On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 05:51:15AM -0700, Al Sparks wrote:

...

Oh and the qmail server? My employer went Exchange. And slowly but surely, the IT there is becoming more Microsoft with Linux becoming more of an outlier. It's probably time for me to find another job. It's hard, because I've been with them a long time. === Al

Or its time for you to make a direct presentation to the upper level management showing that the number of direct staffers needed to administer an MS environment is between 15 and 300% higher than a corresponding UNIX/Linux environment.

Why "Upper management" and not IT management? Because IT management BENEFITS from having more staff to manage. When your headcount increases and your budget is larger, your management importance and status goes up and you become recognized as a "peer" of those who may become the next CEO.

UNIX/Linux is bad for the IT empire builders because it is good for the rest of the company. It reduces costs and headcount while increasing increases reliability and security at the same time.

Jeff Kinz

Jeff is correct....

If you look at the IT manpower and how the org charts play. The windows support staff will map out to more managers and more managers of managers.

The side effect is that the audience of any presentation will be level mismatched. Windows oriented managers will be pitching budget and needs two or three levels above a Linux support staff doing the same work simply because the staff size mismatch.

At a previous Unix based hardware computer company I did some curiosity driven research and noted that the company had more staff (mostly contractors) supporting windows for the internal "needs" of the company than the company had support staff (both hardware and software) for the paying customers. The organization structure was disjoint and difficult to map.... At times a windows support person would show up to fix "something" I would look at the name tag and try to find what group the person was in and most often I would not have considered it a windows support group.

Much of the Unix support was done in the spare time by a handful of folk where the Windows support was managed by a 'staff'. Very different staffing and management model....

Also there is the comfort factor -- schools teach Windows stuff in computer science departments. Managers and sales staff that can type know outlook, excel and word.

To complicate this, legal requirements mandate lots of stuff.

In the 'free' software universe we live in it is hard to comprehend how much money is spent to guarantee that all software is legal. Compliance in this regard costs a lot.

Of interest the Unix community and the Windows world have very different security models. For the most part Unix is transparent while windows is opaque. There is a reason that VMS was so popular....

RobertH wrote:

...

Al wrote: I was going to recommend roughly the same thing.

Oops, the word *source* can get you huh... ;->

What I actually recommended was going to the source website to fully understand the usage and internals.

At the source website you can get the software source and the reasons behind it.

One can google for more info after that.

I believe the OP is/was more than intelligent enough to get source and implement etc.

I know DJB from the IETF; quite the personality. And actually before that as he went to UofM, and I went to MSU... But then the IETF is filled with people that stand out; it draws us together.

I need the deamontools for the HIPL DNS proxy, and was looking for what my options were for setting it up.

Source it is, it seems....

Al Sparks wrote:

There was a lot of rudeness and snarkyness on that list. They aren't kind to those they consider fools.

DJB has his acolytes, much like Linus Torvalds does. I suspect that DJB's personality reflects the overall tone of DJB related online communities, much like Torvalds's personality affects groups like this. I have to say, DJB's software offerings are top rate.

Qmail??? That thing that would accept all messages from a dictionary attack and try to return bounce messages to each even if they all had the same undeliverable address? I ran that for a short time because it was included in a distribution and besides blocking the outbound queue with the bogus bounces, accepting those messages must have gotten them on some widely-sold list for spamming. Even after replacing the mailer with something that quickly rejected invalid local addresses, I kept getting about 50,000 spam attempts a day for years to those addresses.

And wasn't bright enough to send group messages to the same host destination as a single copy with multiple addresses, even back in the days when bandwidth was expensive and hard to get.

I don't see why anyone ever put up with it, especially when the license prohibited distributing copies that fixed the obvious flaws.