[BlueOnyx:10040] Re: Conf files replaced by update

[Frank Soyer]

Hi Chris,

Le 04/04/2012 15:12, Chris Gebhardt - VIRTBIZ Internet a écrit :
> Hi Frank,
>
> Frank Soyer wrote:
>>> Generally you shouldn't modify your sendmail.cf. Any modification should go
>>> into sendmail.mc, which our updates will never overwrite. So whenever
>>> sendmail.cf is rebuilt from the sendmail.mc during an update, your changes
>>> will be retained.
>> Are you sure ? When I modify the .cf, I need to compile the .mc file as
>> sendmail only know this one.
>> So the .mc file contains my modifications at this time. You see ?
> I'm not sure that I understand what you wrote exactly.
>
> The proper order of things would be to edit sendmail.mc, and then run
> "make" to compile and create the sendmail.cf.  You should not be editing
> directly into the sendmail.cf if you want permanent changes.
>
> I do agree that sendmail.mc should not be overwritten.   However I do
> confirm this to NOT be the case in some events.  I have seen our
> customizations to sendmail.mc mysteriously vanish without a trace.  That
> is unfortunate.
Oops oops oops... My apologize, I was upside down... Ok I understand 
where is the problem with sendmail, at least ;)
I modify the .mc instead of directly the .cf. Thanks
>
>>>> Second, on some BO servers, my customers have requested the most recent
>>>> version of PHP.
>>> 5107R and 5108R already come with PHP-5.3.3 pre-installed, while the older
>>> 5106R of course still uses PHP-5.1.6.
>> Yes, but the 5107 and 5108 are based on Scientific Linux and it's
>> problematic for some clients, convincing them to use CentOS instead of
>> RH was already complicated, so Scientific Linux.... I know that you had
>> already have this remarks and that you are working on the CentOS6
>> release, right ?
> Scientific Linux is a problem for your clients?  Really?   It shouldn't
> be.   It's the exact same binaries, and honestly I've found the SL
> updates to be superior to CentOS in terms of time it takes to be
> delivered.  Besides... SL being released by Fermilab, Cern and a
> collection of other research labs and schools, in my mind, gives it a
> better support base than the loose group of guys on the CentOS team.
> Nothing against them, but they've really sort of fallen behind by losing
> focus with in-fighting and power struggles.  SL just cooks along...
Ah, you know, even if they are aware about open source, they *need* to 
know what they'll use, and if CentOS start to be known, SL isn't at 
all... Some customers have totally refused to have it on their servers. 
So I decided to stay with CentOS for now and avoid these questions.
>> If it's so, I suppose there is no possibility to just install the
>> "base-*" files from 5607 or 5608 on this boxes, by modifying the yum
>> repos, and keeping the PHP5.3 installed ?
> I would not recommend this.  You're adding yet another layer of
> complexity and magnet for trouble.
Yes I suspected that ;)
>>> Additionally for 5106R, 5107R and 5108R there are supported third party PHP
>>> updates available from Solarspeed.net and Compass Networks. None of these
>>> third party PHP updates requires any changes to AdmServ. Likewise, these third
>>> party PHP updates don't break during YUM updates and are available with (and
>>> without) subscription to future PHP updates.
> I *HIGHLY* recommend to our customers and to the public in general...
> don't go trying to "improve" or "fix" BlueOnyx on your own.  Pay just a
> little bit of money (there is nothing I've seen for sale that rises to
> the level of "too expensive") and get it done right.   After all, if
> it's your BUSINESS that's involved here, why would you risk headaches
> and problems to save just a few bucks?   That's small thinking.   Don't
> we all have better things to be concerned with than spending hours to
> reinvent the wheel when we could spend a few bucks and just plug it in?
You're right, the problem was that it was my BEGINNING of business... 
Open Source permit to begin a work without the need of funds, it's on of 
its advantages. But I agree that at a certain point, some paid tools 
begin to be necessary.
>> About that, can you tell me if the prices given on Solarspeed for
>> example are a definitive prices, or a yearly (monthly ?) rental ?
> Solarspeed's pricing is a one-time purchase.  Buy it once per server.
> It's not a subscription model such as with Plesk or cPanel.
OK
Thank you for spent time.

Frank