[Tfug] /.: Red Hat Linux is ending

Sun Nov 9 18:38:29 MST 2003

"What's better is that up2date/apt with Fedora Core does not force you 
through that silly registration process. No more limit of one box per 
registration."

Now that's cool.

"Focus in the distro?"

Yeah, and how it's delivered and scheduled (release time, technical 
support).  I don't think there are many enigneers at Red Hat losing sleep 
over whether the latest version of the GIMP is on RHEL AS.  That's more of a 
desktop/home user/hobbyists thing.  And there is the more conservative 
policy regarding kernel versions.  I think if RH were to continue the Red 
Hat Linux line, it would have included the 2.6 kernel long before RHEL.

Darrenn

>From: "johngalt" <johngalt1 at uswest.net>
>Reply-To: Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
>To: "Tucson Free Unix Group" <tfug at tfug.org>
>Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Tfug] /.: Red Hat Linux is ending
>Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:36:29 -0700
>
>Darrenn Jackson wrote:
> > Craig,
> >
> > Exactly what I was thinking.  I run RH9 on my laptop at home, and
> > quite frankly I am excited, not worried about moving over to Fedora
> > when the time comes.
>-snip-
> > The free demo RHN account is really cool,
>
>What's better is that up2date/apt with Fedora Core does not force you
>through that silly registration process. No more limit of one box per
>registration.
>
> > but it does not
> > automatically update non-essential stuff.  For example, I had to
> > download and install the latest GAIM rpm on my own.  Meanwhile, Red
> > Hat is switching it is focus to its enterprise offers, which of course
> > requires a much different focus in the distro than the Red Hat Linux
> > desktop.
>
>Focus in the distro?
>
> > I, for one, applaud what Red Hat is doing (although the move to
> > Fedora maybe a pain in neck),
>
>Don't understand how you figure the move may be a pain in the neck. From
>what I have read, the upgrade path from RH to FC will be the same as going
>from Red Hat X to Red Hat Y
>
> > they have managed to both concentrate
> > on kicking some serious propietary UNIX and M$ butt
>
>One way the RH Enterprise model is good is when you have PHB management who
>*prefers* to pay because of the comfort level afforded by being able to 
>call
>for support/pass blame when things go wrong. Because they have an SLA, they
>feel like they have leverage when the finger pointing starts.
>
>These are the kind of places that spend $ to get a consultant telling them
>to standardize on Oracle. Then if you are Oracle, you want a platform for
>which they back port fixes on old kernels/packages for five years.  That
>makes the app vendor's life easier.
>
>Seems like this combines all the "benefits" of proprietary commercial apps
>with open source OS.
>
>Johnny
>
>
> > with it is higher
> > end stuff, while supporting the community with a free home/hobbyist
> > distro whose development and content are aligned much more with the
> > philosophy of Debian.  My hat (excuse the pun) is off to them.  It is
> > the same basic distro, but could keep RMS happy and provide you with
> > the freshest stuff.  Long live Fedora!!!
> >
> > Darrenn
> >
> >
> >> From: craig at daters.net
> >> Reply-To: craig at daters.net, Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
> >> To: Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
> >> Subject: Re[2]: [Tfug] /.: Red Hat Linux is ending
> >> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:36:44 -0700
> >>
> >> Hello All,
> >>
> >> We run Red Hat at work. I'm not worried. I run Red Hat at home, I'm
> >> not worried about that either, except that I may be looking at Gentoo
> >> and maybe even the Linux From Scratch project. I want to build Linux
> >> from the ground up. Certainly, I want a little more control of how
> >> things are compiled, where they get put, etc. But I'll still be using
> >> my Red Hat, and maybe Fedora too.
> >>
> >> The only thing that is changing, really, is their support. Once the
> >> RH9 channel shuts down, I'll just have to patch everything myself is
> >> all. Red Hat users had to do that before 'up2date' came about. And
> >> for those with specific requirements...the default rpms that were
> >> available weren't suitable anyway, and had to be tweaked before we
> >> could use them, or we just downloaded and installed our own config.
> >>
> >> 'up2date' just let us rely on Red Hat to take the time to test and
> >> secure things before we got our hands on 'it' so we wouldn't have to
> >> take time out of our precious schedule to do it ourselves. But there
> >> were sacrifices by doing it this way. Red Hat decided where to put
> >> everything. Decided what distro of service we would use, etc. Oh we
> >> got choices...sure, we got 1000's of rpms to decide from during
> >> installation. Why else would the retail package of Red Hat Linux 9
> >> Professional come with 9 CD's and a DVD? But Red Hat still determined
> >> where everything went. I'm still figuring out how they have all of
> >> Apache deployed on my server. I upgraded from 7.3, and oh what a
> >> difference as far as what is where, etc. But I'm getting there. We
> >> persevere as Linux users/admins. Thats the fun in using Linux right?
> >>
> >> What bothers me is that everyone on the RedHat RHN list suddenly is
> >> crying that an 'era' is ending. Are they scared to look into Fedora
> >> because it doesn't say 'Red Hat Linux'. Red Hat has stated that they
> >> will continue to support this 'Project' as it is the test bed for
> >> their Enterprise level product. They have more people working on
> >> Fedora than there were working on Red Hat Linux, this is a good thing
> >> folks. But because Fedora is their test bed, not everything at will
> >> ultimately make it into Red Hat Enterprise Linux, because they are
> >> developing a platform with less updates, while certainly
> >> maintaining stability and security. Not every IT department has the
> >> time to update their servers on a constant basis. Red Hat's service
> >> is that they take the time to back port/patch everything so you don't
> >> have to. Is there no value in this? Not for a home/hobbiest user
> >> maybe. They have always maintained that for the user wanting to be
> >> 'on the edge' of a developing technology. Certainly download the iso
> >> and go! This is available still, only now it's called Fedora! But
> >> for those users concerned with security and stability, they provide
> >> the Enterprise level of Linux. And for the $ amount your comfortable
> >> with, you can subscribe to their 'up2date' service as well as have
> >> access to phone or web support.
> >>
> >> In my mind, the people who are all up in arms should just let it
> >> happen, and move into Fedora. Updates will still be provided as
> >> vulnerabilities are found. Download them and install them just like
> >> you always have. You still want to be on the cutting edge of
> >> technology anyway right? So why worry about RHEL, which will probably
> >> be a couple kernel versions behind anyway?
> >>
> >> I probably opened myself up to a whole lot of jabs, but there is my
> >> two cents anyway.
> >>
> >> Friday, November 7, 2003, 10:07:02 AM, you wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Ahh... Thank you.  I suspected something along those lines, but not
> >> being a redhatter, I didn't have the motivation to look into it.
> >> But it just makes sense that Redhat -> Fedora shouldn't be
> >>> the end of the world for all "hat" people.
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From:   tfug-bounces at tfug.org on behalf of johngalt
> >>> Sent:   Wed 11/5/2003 9:23 PM
> >>> To:     Tucson Free Unix Group
> >>> Cc:
> >>> Subject:        Re: [Tfug] /.: Red Hat Linux is ending
> >>> Dang! People are really overreacting to this. That Orbital Sander
> >>> guy who posted this to /. was way too negative, err abrasive.
> >>
> >>> After looking past the FUD and whining, I think this is a good
> >>> thing.
> >>
> >>> What this means to me:
> >>> Old name: Red Hat
> >>> New Name: Fedora Core - OMG!
> >>> Old way for errata and security updates: up2date
> >>> New way for errata and security updates: up2date, apt, yum
> >>> Old lifecycle:12-24 months
> >>> New Lifecycle: 6 months (read-new packages sooner)
> >>
> >>> Uh, what this guy said....
> >>> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=84550&cid=7387059
> >>
> >>> Johnny
> >>
> >>
> >>> Angus Scott-Fleming wrote:
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >>  craig (mailto:craig at daters.net)
> >>  http://www.daters.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tfug mailing list
> >> tfug at tfug.org
> >> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95.
> > https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tfug mailing list
> > tfug at tfug.org
> > http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug
>
>_______________________________________________
>tfug mailing list
>tfug at tfug.org
>http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug

_________________________________________________________________
Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $26.95.  
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)