[CALUG] repartitioning on the fly

[James Ewing Cottrell 3rd]

Sorry. While I agree that in theory, assumptions are bad, they are all 
we have to go on. And we make assumptions all the time!

Now I haven't heard anyone say Red Hat 4.1 either, but my point is that 
you are likely to start hearing it more often. The fact that Google 
supports the Correct nomenclature is due to several factors:

[1] Google is Historic. It's got Old Stuff.
[2] People tend to be more correct when writing.

The fact is, that Jason DID make an assumption! He took a novice 
literally, when the evidence was overwhelmingly against him.

Here is what SHOULD have happened:

[1] Jason reads areticle, sees "Red Hat 4.1"
[2] Thinks "Wow, that's really ancient"
[3] Upon reflection, realizes that there is another 4.1 Release from Red 
Hat, called "Enterprise Linux"
[4] Realizes that she probably means that
[5] However, just to be sure, starts his post of with:

"Wow! Red Hat 4.1 is almost 10 years old. You don't by any chance mean 
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Advanced Server 4.1 do you? If the former, you 
need to upgrade. If the latter, here's what you need to do..."

Anyone worthy of the name "Consultant" should be able to pick that up. 
All I can say is that Jason missed a chance to impress me.

Note that it is even permissible to have missed the 4.1 => RHEL 
equivalence. A simple "I didn't think of that" will do nicely. What will 
NOT do is insisting that you are Right because you are Technically Correct.

You have to hear what people mean despite what they say.

JIM

P.S. Do you really think that the SEC has old servers running 4.1??? I 
doubt it!

David A. Cafaro wrote:
> Actually those that questioned what release she was using were correct
> to do so.  It is ALWAYS a bad idea to assume something when trying to
> diagnose computer problems, that can lead you to dead ends at best and
> lost data/hardware at worse.
> 
> Also even as old as RH 4.1 is, I would not be surprised to find a
> version still running in some hidden server room somewhere.  I've found
> servers running far older software than that still in full production
> use.
> 
> And a final note, a google search of RedHat 4.1, the first two pages at
> least all refer to the RedHat 4.1 and not RHEL 4 update 1.  I have not
> met anyone yet online or offline (until now) that referred to RHEL 4
> updates as . release.
> 
> I just point this out as it isn't about being to literal as trying to be
> correct.  The only way to be correct is to confirm what someone is
> actually talking about.  RedHat 4.1 is a vague answer these days, as
> this thread has definitely shown.
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 16:26 -0500, James Ewing Cottrell 3rd wrote:
> 
>>You are being Too Literal. What is Officially called "RHEL 4.1" or "Red 
>>Hat Advanced Server 4.1" is being called "Red Hat 4.1" by people on the 
>>street (or at least the net) these days, including the original poster.
>>
>>Yes, RH4.1 is so old that for all practical purposes It No Longer 
>>Exists. It may not even run on newer hardware. So she couldn't possibly 
>>mean that. Besides, anyone playing with Linux back in those days 
>>probably wouldn't ask a question like that.
>>
>>My point is that you should have been able to figure out that she was 
>>talking about RHEL AS 4.1 rather than the decade-old Red Hat 4.1.
>>
>>JIM
>>
>>Jason Dixon wrote:
>>
>>>On Nov 16, 2005, at 12:49 AM, James Ewing Cottrell 3rd wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>No, she is correct. You should have known what she meant.
>>>
>>>
>>>Correct about what?  There is only one product known as "Red Hat 4.1"  
>>>and it was deprecated YEARS ago.  I wasn't trying to pick on her, but  
>>>it obviously confused others as well, and we were concerned that she  
>>>might be using an unsupported system.  Why do you claim to speak for  
>>>Joan, a week after the thread ended anyway?
>>>
>>></need caffeine>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Jason Dixon
>>>DixonGroup Consulting
>>>http://www.dixongroup.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Columbia, Maryland Linux User's Group (CALUG) mailing list
>>>CALUG Website: http://www.calug.com
>>>Email postings to: lug at calug.com
>>>Change your list subscription options: http://calug.com/mailman/listinfo/lug
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Columbia, Maryland Linux User's Group (CALUG) mailing list
>>CALUG Website: http://www.calug.com
>>Email postings to: lug at calug.com
>>Change your list subscription options: http://calug.com/mailman/listinfo/lug
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Columbia, Maryland Linux User's Group (CALUG) mailing list
> CALUG Website: http://www.calug.com
> Email postings to: lug at calug.com
> Change your list subscription options: http://calug.com/mailman/listinfo/lug
>