Re: Free software companies and stock options

[Suresh Ramasubramanian <sureshr@xxxxxxx>]

Prakash Advani rearranged electrons thusly:

> Yes I agree that setting Linux to work well can be an uphill task but
> trust me setting up any UNIXes can be a nightmare! Linux is far far

Solaris is quite ok, decent if you obidiently follow the defaults (best to do
so, and chop and change later <g>)

> What I really like about UNIX's and more so Linux, is that once you set
> it up it hardly requires any maintenance.
 
 That can be said of most unices ;)  However, a periodic reboot does help ... I
 have heard of cases where a server went down after over a year of uptime - and
 hung in the middle of the bootup, because some daemon had been upgraded, but
 not written into the startup scripts.  While I can't claim to have the good
 fortune of having such a viagra-eating server (always up!) with me, I
 experienced this on a smaller scale (with a network card <g>) once.
 
> About other Unixes. I have spent 6 months trying to get tcp/ip working
> well under SCO only to realise that there was a bug in the TCP/IP

With SCO, bugs would be the first things to check - sometime back at least.
When was this?   A guy on a newsgroup I read is from Intel, he told me that
they use SCO extensively on their production boxen - and love it.  

The second half of Wintel uses Windows mostly in the corporate offices (mainly
because corporate types everywhere would likely commit suicide if denied
exchange and lotus notes) - but takes the simple precaution of having 'doze and
exchange servers behind unix firewalls and sendmail bastion mailservers. 

> module! and to make matter worse, SCO at that time only support 3
> network cards which included ne2000 but ne2000 clones didn't work!
 
 When was this?  Sounds like donkeys years ago (or about 4 to 5 years ago, with
 the typically ancient SCOs I've seen ... our college had one such box, along
 with an equally ancient netware 3.x box)
 
> About the setup at Chip, even though I convinced Gourav Jaswal, Kiran
> was entirely responsible for setting it up.
 
 Good for you - you paved the way for Kiran to get started anyway ;)

	+suresh