[NTLUG:Discuss] Redhat9 - hostid doesn't work

[fredjame]

Chris Cox wrote:

> Steve Martindell wrote:
>
>> I just installed Redhat9 and requested everything on
>> the CD(s).
>>
>> When I type hostid it returns nothing!
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> [stevem at x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 ~]$ hostid
>> 0
>> [stevem at x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 ~]$ which hostid
>> /usr/bin/hostid
>> [stevem at x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 ~]$ uname -a
>> Linux x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 2.4.20-6 #1 Thu Feb 27 10:01:19 EST 2003 
>> i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> When I reboot same computer into SuSE hostid works properly.
>
>
> Do you really need hostid??  Just curious.  I wouldn't count
> on it.
>
> With that said, RH9 has many, many problems (not everyone
> will experience these btw):
>
> 1. Won't install at all on Compaq DL380G2/G3 boxes.
> (well you have to create a fs first and copy the cds
> to it in order to install).  RH8 and earlier do not
> have any problems with this platform (which is
> considered to be the #1 2U unit in the world today).
>
> 2. Many installs fail on CD2, forever claiming that
> CD2 isn't inserted.  Have seen this both in VMware
> and outside of VMware.  Just plain weird.  You can
> use the technique in 1 as a workaround.
>
> 3. RH's networking scripts are very bad.  Make way too
> many assumptions and use tools that are known to make
> mistakes.   Result is either, no network detected,
> no dhcp-dns registration, or a very confused network
> setup.  This is probably the most frustrating of them
> all.  RH relies on things like mii-diag to see if
> the data link as been established.  I estimate mii-diag
> to work ok on about 50% of all network cards (maybe
> less than that).  In a dhcp environment, establishing
> the presence of the "link light" should probably
> just be a warning if done at all.
>
> 4. UTF-8 ... nuff said (same as in RH8).
>
> 5. Lack of various tools because they might cause
> some legal issues (emphasis on might).  Granted
> RH could be considered the "safe" distribution.  I've
> never been a big fan of technology that tries to
> be "safe" though.  Most of the tools are things like
> mp3/decss related software.... though other dists
> also have some difficulties here.
>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Also, the default path in Redhat doesn't have "compress/uncompress" !?
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> [stevem at x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 ~]$ uncompress
>> compress: Command not found.
>> [stevem at x1-6-00-10-b5-3a-b3-22 ~]$ echo $path
>> /usr/local/bin /usr/bin /bin /usr/X11R6/bin /usr/X11R6/bin
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This makes it a little hard to install things!
>> What's the deal with Redhat?
>
>
> Ok.. I'll stand up for RH a bit here.  A pure compress routine
> suffers from the LZW Unisys mess.  Uncompress is less of an issue...
> but you may find it hard to get compress regardless of distribution
> nowadays.  Since gzip has become the defacto cross-platform
> standard on may Unix and even non-Unix platforms... I'd just
> start using it.  However, if you have a compressed package,
> gzip should be able to decompress it (so you can just alias
> or symlink it if you want to gunzip).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> https://ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
Beginning with RH9 (I skipped from 7.3 to 9, so I have never tried 8.x) 
I am fan of Mandrake (editorial note: of Mandrake, I have only tried 9.1).
However, as to failing to boot an install from CD - my experience is 
this is fixed by making a floppy from the boot.img file on the CD, and 
booting from the floppy - not going to work on a system that doesn't 
have a floppy drive, of course.

-- 
...small is beautiful.