On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 10:42:56AM -0600, Ed Wilts wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 10:49:04AM -0500, Andy Firman wrote: > > I am trying to build an apache 2.0.48 rpm for > > RedHat 9 like this: > > The first question you need to ask yourself is why you're trying to > build this version. In many cases that I've seen, new users are > misguided in thinking that they need or want the latest version rather > than concentrating on getting the current version working. Well I am not a new Linux user, but a new "RedHat 9" user. I had a client ask me to do 2 things to his Redhat 9 box. Get Apache 2.0.48 and PHP 4.3.4 installed. I failed miserably on both and am now taking a big step back to do this stuff on one of my test boxes. Time to learn! > > > A more basic question is, what is the preferred way > > to get the latest software into RedHat 9? > > The preferred way is to stay at the version that Red Hat provides. > That's one of the values that the distributor provides - to solve > dependency issues. > I agree 100%. But the client asked me for the latest and greatest. > > Or should I really try hard to stay with the package > > management system? > > rpm is very powerful is you use it as it's intended. If you fight it, > it will hurt you in the end. I agree 100%. Same thing with Debian's dpkg system. > > So let's back up and start with defining the problem that you're > actually trying to solve, not what you're trying to do. > > .../Ed > > p.s. Don't take this is a personal attack - I once too thought that I > always needed the latest release. > No offense taken. I greatly appreciate your comments and feedback. How about I ask the question this way: "If you were asked to install Apache 2.0.48 and PHP 4.3.4 on a RedHat 9 server, how would you do the task at hand?" :-) I look forward to hearing how everyone would approach this. Thanks, Andy -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
