| xingu | geometrically so |
| EdLin | sandman: older software doesn't mean less security holes to fix |
| sandman | Perhaps instead I should just say that there is a one year grace period after an new release is made. After this period, support is mostly dropped simply for the sake of costs. |
| sanxiyn | sandman: Certainly, I can imagine someone may be interested in security fixes to Woody. The difficult part is to get the enough interest and resource. |
| xingu | EdLin: or less impact from fixing them. |
| sanxiyn | sandman: That sounds reasonable. |
| sandman | sanxiyn: I can do that. |
| sanxiyn | (Hell, *I* am using NAS which runs customized version of Debian Woody/ARM.) |
| xingu | it's a much harder proposition to take some patch p, backport it, re-release impacted package set s, and all without causing any breakage. |
| sandman | You know, if they use a server for internal-only purposes, and it's only used by a certain number of people... and those people can be trusted and accounted for... likely security is not as much of an issue as stability is. |
| sanxiyn | I mostly don't care to update that though. |
| sandman | For instance, if I'm running a business with my brother, and only he and I will use a system, and it's not connected to the internet in any direct way (or to anyone else for that matter), security is somehow less of an issue. |
| rrk | anyone around for help with a Ati radeon x1600 |
| EdLin | !anyone |
| dpkg | Please do not ask if anyone uses, knows, is good with, can help you with or is a guru/expert of <someprogram>. Instead, ask your real question. (If the real question _was_ "does anyone use <someprogram>?" ask me about <popcon> instead.) See <ask> <sicco> <ask-to-ask> <polls> |
| xingu | sandman: and in that situation do you think that some third party could sell you or your brother the idea of a software maintenance contract? |
| rrk | cant start x with an Ati X1600 |
| sandman | xingu: Hm... I wouldn't think so |
| xingu | sandman: now you start to appreciate the problem I think. |
| sandman | Why would one do that, it's not really open for exploitation anyway. And typically Debian systems run pretty darn stable indeed. |
| xingu | sandman: what can and does work, is selling preloaded appliances; define the inputs and outputs and drop a box built on current-stable that does the job |
| sandman | xingu: So in summary, backporting to an old release outside its 1-year grace period is pointless for a number of reasons. I think I've a healthy conclusion to the discussion then :) |
| xingu | sandman: once it hits its functional end of life either from a hardware or sw maintenance pov, sell another box to spec. |
| sandman | xingu: Right. Basically say here's a machine that will do this that and the other thing, and past this period of time, it will slip out of the support cycle (although that exact time is unspecified; could be tomorrow, could be 3 years from now, who knows) |
| xingu | sandman: exactly; it's an easy sell, because the sheep are preconditioned to the idea of in- and out- of warranty periods. |
| sandman | And you can still use it if it works, of course, but they might want to think about a dist-upgrade ($$$$), or just keeping it off the internet and instead on a private network consisting of trusted individuals. Works for me. |
| xingu | sandman: out of warranty, support changes to time/materials, which allows you to fire up your oldstable buildhost and rebuilt bespoke patch sets if required - charging hourly rate to do so. |
| sandman | And if that scenario becomes popular enough, what you mentioned about speakig with the Debian Foundation about infrastructure support would apply :) |
| xingu | sandman: given the economics, folk tend to persuade themselves that the same fiscal resource with some term "improved performance" as a byproduct is a better pick |
| sandman | However this is unlikely... I can't see ever making a living on backporting stuff... but, heck, should it happen by some act of God, surely I'll take that route as well. |
| xingu | sandman: I'm not speaking purely theoretically on this btw. |
| jetscreamer | !xinerama |
| dpkg | extra, extra, read all about it, xinerama is where you have several monitors but only one logical desktop -- XFree86 4.0 and X.org have it! Documentation is available: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/other-formats/html_single/Xinerama-HOWTO.html http://pwp.netcabo.pt/0150048402/linux/Multiple_Nvidia_Multiple_Head.html |
| sandman | xingu: This is a proven system? :) xingu: As a methodology for sales and contract, that is. |
| xingu | sandman: it worked while I was doing it - worst split between current and customer was being hauled in to fix a problem with uucp locking on a 0.93r3-ish system circa bo |
| action | xingu notes that early linux tty/cua locking reeked |
| xingu | notes that early linux tty/cua locking reeked |
| sandman | lol |