On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 02:30, Jeremy Portzer wrote: > On Mon, 2003-06-30 at 11:44, Tom Diehl wrote: > > On 30 Jun 2003, Jeremy Portzer wrote: > > > > > Why would you be running the RHL 8.0 version of redhat-config-network on > > > RHL 9 anyway? I mean, maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems > > > that it's fairly presumptious to mix and match configuration software > > > like this (old r-c-network, new OS) and expect it to work. Can you > > > explain? > > > > He is running 8.0. He asked here b/c he was unable to solve his problem on > > the psyche list. > > Hmm, I missed that part somehow. > Anyway, there are very few drawbacks IMO to upgrading to RHL 9, so > considering that r-c-network is much better in 9, I'd recommend an > upgrade! ;-) I would upgrade if I had the time (I already have shrike in another partition), but I have a lot of services/servers running on my machine which I have to migrate. Every now and then, I solve one or so, but not enough yet to move. Yes I like shrike too, I have it on all other machines except this one! Maybe I just justified spending the time on the move, because of all the time I wasted with psyche! And I meant to say redhat-config-network-1.1.20-1 :) -- Iain Buchanan <iain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> So if we don't all vote the same way, we'll be deadlocked and have to be sequestered in the Springfield Palace Hotel ... -- Homer Simpson The Boy Who Knew Too Much
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
