On Sunday 23 April 2006 20:47, Kam Leo wrote: [...] >> >> >Clemson University Math Sciences >> >> >mjs AT clemson DOT edu >> >> >http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs >> > >> >Gene, how is Adobe responsible for a problem caused by Red Hat / >> >Fedora Core developers? You are using essentially the same version >> > of Acrobat Reader that worked without problems for Fedora Core 4. >> > It is not Adobe's fault that the Red Hat / Fedora Core >> > implementers of SELinux changed the rules after Acrobat Reader 7 >> > was released. If you have a bone to pick, take it up with the >> > responsible party. >> >> Well now, I *thought* that was what I was doing in posting to this >> list. and the fix did eventually come from here, no doubt deciphered >> by someone intimatly familiar with selinux and the errors it may >> cause to be thrown. As a new user to selinux, how would I have >> recognized that error when the docs are so limited, literally one >> page, 1/3 of which is credits. >> >> But it appears the fix is to request that Adobe include that command >> in the rpms post-install script, so I have also requested that of >> Adobe. >> >> Applying logic, there isn't a whole lot the FC release crew could >> have done or would need to do to alleviate it once the nature of the >> problem was known. It is not their code to be responsible for, its >> Adobe's, so if they want it to run on an as installed FC5 box, which >> it should, then its up to them to fix it IMNSHO. >> >> Is this the wrong attitude on my part? >> >> -- >> Cheers, Gene > >Adobe packaged Acrobat Reader for a generic Linux distribution. Where >is it written that Adobe owes Red Hat / Fedora Core preferential >treatment over the other Linux distributions? You will need to present >a strong case for why Adobe should provide a customized package for >Red Hat users. It appears from my reading on other lists, that selinux is gradually taking over the internal security of many distros, so I don't think its fair to point the finger *just* at redhat. To me, its something that appears to be set in fairly firm cement until the next great idea comes along. The rapid change of linux is both a blessing because we get to play with new stuff and of course if it breaks we get to keep all the pieces, and a curse, particularly for those who try to support it. Adobe no doubt expects to get a year or more out of a release, and when there is a new linux release from somewhere weekly it seems, they should then watch how it works in the field a little closer. I don't right now, know which is the newer release of the two. I will say that this 7.0.5 release seems to be considerably better polished than previous ones were, which means that Adobe is internally convinced the linux is worth supporting well. Now if they made an Acrobat for linux, how many copies of that would sell? Given a reasonable price, I dare say the numbers would surprise them because we could then edit a pdf. I might consider spending a big buck on it myself. But not 3 or 4 of them, its not worth that much to me. -- Cheers, Gene People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word 'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
