Re: [squid-users] simple questions

26-Mar-02 at 05:23, Joe Cooper (joe@swelltech.com) wrote :
> I may not maintain more production Squid caches than anyone on this list
> (Duane might handle more than me with the nlanr caches), but I wouldn't
> bet on it. Admittedly, they are mostly used in the same type of
> environment (ISP), but that environment is the hardest load I can think
> of for a web cache. So, my testing is pretty complete--moreso than most.

OK, point taken.

> Not to be ornery about it, but I'm just not willing to take reactionary
> anti-Red Hat FUD (not that you, Simon, are necessarily a purveyor of
> FUD, though you are repeating what FUDders have said) at face value.

I don't even know what FUD stands for, and I haven't looked it up. I was
not going to repeat anything but that mysql and gnu themselves have posted
web pages with concerns about this issue.

> Quite frankly, I believe Bero's explanation about the whole
> thing...which can be summed up as "It's not the compiler that is wrong."
> He makes a convincing case that the programs that fail on 2.96,
> /ought/ to fail, because they are wrong. I'd link to it here, but I
> haven't the foggiest notion where it is on Red Hat's page.

I agree, although RedHat have updated the compiler with 7.1 in their
errata and although still 2.96 it's a later version. Maybe the compiler
isn't at fault, maybe it is the code of mysql and other apps with
problems. But if they work correctly with other compilers, maybe it's
better to use another compiler. All we are establishing here is that
probably Squid has clean enough code to not fall foul of what MySQL has
/possibly/ fallen foul of.

There are linkers, libraries, etc also that enter into play as well as the
compiler itself. It may end up being a problem with all sorts of things,
which happen to be a subset of a certain 2.96 version or a certain stock
RPM for compiler utils that RedHat ships.

I'm not bashing RedHat, it's the only distro we use, just to keep
everything the same on our network.

But as a new adopter, doing a new compile for one machine, I might still
be persuaded to downgrade to 2.95 to avoid all this question. The shit has
been thrown, and it is sticking. Even if it is thrown by FUDders (whatever
that may mean).

I have a couple versions of Squid compiled with 2.96 that have not
exhibited any problems, and I will take your word for it Joe, that I can
use 2.96 and not have to grab a 2.95 RPM and waste time unnecessarily for
what may be a non-issue.

Simon

--
[Simon White. vim/mutt. simon@mtds.com. GIMPS:56.17% see www.mersenne.org]
           /"\    ASCII Ribbon Campaign
           \ /    Respect for open standards
            X     No HTML/RTF in email
           / \    No M$ Word docs in email