Slashdot Mirror

No, you can debug it, if you want. The web text refers to an old beta, but you can get to the latest beta version by navigating FTP. Assuming, of course, you can get in.

I submitted a story on this prior to this one, but the gyst is this: Due to this move, anyone who wants to use RHN still will have 3 options:

install RH9 on their systems, overwriting whatever OS was there. Problems: long downtime to install OS then re-set everything up, depending on a X.0 release for everything

"upgrade" current systems to RH9. In my experience, longer downtime than just doing a clean install - things break, get annoying, etc.

hack their systems to look, act, and talk like RH9 systems tothe RHN update software, so you can still update them through RHN

personally, I think I'll just let this year be the last year I'm subscribed to RHN, then either get my updates from someone else (redcarpet?) or I'll just mirror the ftp://updates.redhat.com server locally and run my own service. I don't see any of those 3 above options working for me. Has RedHat gone insane? Do they not realize people count on linux in an enterprise environment, where anything beyond a few minutes downtime is very bad??

I wanted to find some more information myself about Linux supporting 64-bit processors and this is what I found. Mandrake will have support by early 2003, I'm not sure if it's done now or not but it should be nearly done. Redhat is also offering support for the X86-64, check out the news release. Personally I think this is a great oppertunity for Linux to catch up to MS in market share. I look forward to upgrading...

Whatever happened to choice in this debate?

We can choose between various window managers, various linux flavors, and even office suites. Why don't we have a choice with our window system?

Why would it be any different for a fork of X for a choice between client/server and direct rendering, if backwards compatability was kept?
Would that not help the the people who only use Linux on their desktop, while allowing people with networks to use the tool, as it is now, that works for them?

More info
any other info about this?

Hasn't Red Hat stopped support of 6.2? Hmmmmm...

Not until March 31st. :)
http://www.redhat.com/apps/support/errata/

Of course, I didn't see an update to their 2.2 series kernels in the RHSA for the ptrace vulnerability...

Step 1: Get contract to do Linux support for IBM
Step 2: Get another vendor to do the Linux support for you
Step 3: Profit!

Ok, I'm probably dumb and paranoid. :)

Found a press release about it, afterall, so perhaps RedHat will still be supporting Hammer.

Let's hope so.

Don my smug mug is on smugmug ... is yours?

I'm a little concerned that this may lead to no x86-64 (Opteron, Althon64) support from RedHat. :(

HP co-owns the IP for Itanium with Intel, so they have a vested interest in seeing Itanium get lots of support, and AMD x86-64 get none. RedHat has already announced Itanium versions of Advanced Server, but AFAIK, has been silent on the x86-64 front.

SuSE has announced long ago that they'd release x86-64 versions of their distro to coincide with Opteron's release, and they seem to be actively involved with that process.

Am I being paranoid here? Or does it look like RH might not support the most cost-effective 64bit platform going? Not all of us have deep pockets for I2. :(

Don
my smug mug is on smugmug ... is yours?

I try to avoid bzip2 because it is so slow, even on modern hardware. bzip2 compresses very well, much better than gzip. A bzip2 version of this card makes sense ....

TRON is more of an OS specificication than an OS; many vendors implement the TRON API in their RTOS, and many applications (in Japan) are developed for it. This project could be cool because it would enable companies to adopt Linux while maintaining compatibility with their legacy embedded apps -- provided this does not become a proprietary MontaVista technology. The benefit of Linux is the massive amount of hardware it will run on, and the all the development tools & libraries available.


Redhat's eCos already supports uITRON (Micro Industrial TRON, the most popular flavor) through a compatibility layer.

To those who are saying this isn't an apples to apples comparison, the remote vs. local difference may apply to this one, but look at red hat's list of security holes just for 2003. Compares this with Microsoft's list for 2003 and its not even close..

I much prefer an open-source game; it allows me to make tweaks and implement house rules; something a proprietary game does not allow.

- Sam

I much prefer an open-source game; it allows me to make tweaks and implement house rules; something a proprietary game does not allow.

- Sam

Google is/may become a monopoly in the search space. As a previous discussion noted, it has entered into our common vocabulary. In such a situation, where do the rights of a private organization end, and that of the public good begin?

For instance, if PacBell (substitute your local phone company here) stops carrying calls over its physical network that use other long distance services, or Microsoft tries putting roadblocks for third party applications on its platform .. umm- scratch the last one.

Pile of wank

Lindows kicks ass as a solution for desktop. Click n Run is just what is needed-Windows Update, minus the idiocy.

Red Hat Linux 8.0 is great-it comes with software that would be worth over $1000 if bought commercially. It's brilliant. I use it every day. A computer illiterate relative uses it great. It, also, kicks ass.

Lycoris is a mad combination of Red Hat and Lindows. All the apps you need with an XP interface.

Linux will smash the balls off of everything on the desktop. Just wait and see.

UnixWare to Linux Porting Guide (development tools and the API)
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/sco-porting.pdf

UnixWare to Linux Porting Guide (development tools and the API)
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/sco-porting.pdf

Oh, really?

Apparently Camp X-Ray if you dare pirate M$ software.

Seriously, this is the kind of news about Microsoft that you should forward to all of your friends, along with notes letting them know that there's other alternatives.

If M$ succeeds any further with their domination the whole computing experience is going to be ruined, no matter what platform you're running. I mean, you have to question what motivates the richest man in the world to still try and gain more control, it's certainly not money, so it must be power . . .

Of course, Bill's attitude fits in well right now with the US's proposed neocolonialist efforts in Iraq -- so they probably make a perfect team. You have to wonder what more the most powerful country in the world wants, when it attempts to control through proxy every other nation. In either case, it's not a good thing.

When your power reaches a certain stage you have a few options. One is to use your power to benefit everyone, and be satisfied that you've reached the top. The other is to have an all or nothing attitude, try and seize everything, and wager ruining yourself, and everyone under you in the process -- because hey, what fun is life once you've reached the top? The only other thing you can do is push it to the edge.

Russia expanded too far, now look at it. Britain expanded to nearly all of the globe, and now it's not controlling even half of that. If Microsoft follows the history of colonialism and imperialism, then they will almost definitely fall. The problem isn't their reign, and how long it will be, but the damage they do in between. Case in point, under colonialist conditions enough damage can be done to a nation's morale that it takes years to fully recover, not to mention the damage done by an outside culture attempting to destroy the formally dominate culture (the heavy usage of French, and its tremendous effect on pure Arabic in places such as Tunisia and Algeria come to mind).

The point is, never think that computers are politically neutral ground. For the past 5-7 years I think M$ has proven that who ends up controlling certain aspects of technology either makes it an enjoyable, or absolutely horrific experience for all.

I clicked the "buy" button and you can order RedHat 8.0 personal edition for $39.95

RedHat Store

actually This says that you only need on cotract per X machines and that you must purchase one subscription per machine that you wish to have on the RHEN, it does not say that you have to have every machine which is running RHAS on the RHEN. So unless I am seriously misreading something here you have basically a more solid server product with an up2date like feature, and if you wish to use that up2date like feature you must have a subscription, in addition you must purchase a support contract for every X machines on which you are running RHAS if you wish to obtain support from Redhat.

"I think the simple solution to people not wanting to pay the Redhat (damn where can I put the $) tax, is to not pay it - use another distro."

The simpler solution is just to download Red Hat Linux for free.

"Use another distro" is an argument you use if you have another agenda.

"$299 for a basic workstation? I can get Win2k Pro for $150 or so with limited support, or I can get Debian (or other various Linux distros) for free"

May I remind you that you can STILL get Red Hat Linux for free?

These are advanced offerings from Red Hat that is meant to compete against similiar advanced offerings from their competitors. If it works out remains to be seen, but Red Hat continue to be one of the (if not THE) most GPL-friendly companies around.

I wasn't very clear in my original statement. Get a testing box, install 7.2. Now download, patch, configure, build, and install a new kernel. Now put a 7.3 CD in the drive, reboot, select "Upgrade" from the installer and see how far you get.

I had to do these very steps to get a better VM and a new IDE (a driver that let me use DMA) driver for a machine at work. In order to get that box functioning, I basically had to make it "un-upgradeable". Therefore when support runs out in December, I will have to either:

a) re-image it, and reconfigure everything on it (at which point I should just buy Advanced Workstation, right?)
b) upgrade packages by hand
c) twiddle with up2date's config so that it think it's a newer release
d) done nothing, switch distros, hope, use apt4rpm, etc.

You wil be forced to do something. Red Hat has decided it.

As to them not supporting after a year, I need to check into this.

From http://redhat.com/apps/support/errata/:

Beginning with the 8.0 release, Red Hat will provide errata maintenance for at least 12 months from the date of initial release. At certain times, Red Hat may extend errata maintenance for certain popular releases of the operating system. End of Life dates for errata maintenance for currently supported products are listed below:

Red Hat Linux 8.0 (Psyche) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.3 (Valhalla) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.2 (Enigma) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.1 (Seawolf) December 31, 2003

I use, and PREFER 7.2. I have installed 8.0 on a couple machines, and don't like it quite as well, perhaps because I am just used to 7.2.

Pardon my French, but tough shit. You'll have to either constantly upgrade, buy AW, or you'll upgrade everything by hand. See the list above. My big beef with Red Hat is that in their move to get everyone on AW/AS, they have forgotten the "little guy" like you and me. You don't even have the option to pay for errata support, no matter how badly you need it. Even thought they'll still be making packages for the same release of AW (which will be almost completely compatible with the free version of Red Hat), they won't be making them available to people who want to install packages by hand. It's not just that up2date will stop working -- there won't be any packages anymore.

I worry about upgrading my RENTED RACKSHACK boxes. Its not advisable to update a box that is located 1300 miles away via ssh.

Agreed. That's a sticky issue. I'd make sure someone around there will be able to powercycle if you need them too. I'd also see about getting a failover box or a hot spare similarly configured.

Now if they follow thru with their EOL products 12 months after new release, then my opinion of RH would change, and I would be looking at other distros.

Their EOL plans are certain and definite. Start looking. I've been looking at KRUD (although I wonder where they will get packages), SuSE and Gentoo. The KRUD people, BTW, are evaluating EOL contracts to support older Red Hat releases. That may be a way out for you (and me), provided it's cheap enough.

Outside of building new kernels, which i can do by hand, i see no reason to switch from 7.2, period.

Really? Again, tough shit. Red Hat has made that decision for you. Or, at very least, forced you to decide. That force comes from business needs, not your needs. I'm personally fed up with Red Hat. I've been using it since 4.2, and I own RHAT stock. The thing I liked about Linux was that decisi

These aren't knee-jerk reactions. These are reactions after having read the various announcements and combing through RedHat's material. Yes it's possible I've misread or misinterpreted, but after inspecting RHES product matrix my conclusions were not unreasonable.

BTW, the flagship product is not the downloadable ISO versions, nor the $39.99 version. If it were, they'd most likely go out of business.

Completely not arguing with that.

You say you run a business?

No, I didn't say that.

RedHat has to pay for _everything_ they do to make that software that you don't want to pay for to get their work done. And what's funny is in the end, both of you expect to have made a profit! ;)

Again, not arguing. I'm not annoyed because RedHat is charging money. I'm happy to pay for the services I require, which, specifically is errata updates for the life cycle of the servers I have deployed. I am constrained by a budget however. $2200 CAD per year for 4 servers for what I need (security and major bug fixes) strikes me as over-priced. If, as another poster has said, I can get by on a basic RHN subscription of $60/year/server, then that's much more in line with my cost expectations and budget constraints.

What I specifically am annoyed at RedHat for doing is releasing RedHat 8.0, giving just enough time for admins to deploy RH8 installations (whether or not these admins made bad decisions by deploying a point-Oh release is beside the point), and then announcing that they'll no longer be supporting the distribution past December 31, 2003 and instead encouraging these users to install their RHAS line. Now these admins (and me) have RH8 deployments that will no longer have errata updates. I'm happy to pay for RHLE ES, but boy do I really wish they'd have announced this before I went and deployed an RH 8.0 server.

RedHat also doesn't seem to be offering SLAs for extended errata for their existing "community enthusiast" distributions. I also have some RHL 7.x servers that will be discontinued soon. I'd rather pay RedHat for extended errata support so that I can upgrade those servers when I want to, rather than when they tell me to.

Jason.

Here are links for pricing on RedHat Enterprise Blah Blah and Windows Server 2003.

RedHat seems very competitive at most levels especially considering that there are no CALs to worry about and I don't think the Windows prices include the kind of service included in the RH Standard editions.

But where RedHat really slips in this price structure is at the bottom end web server pricing. The cheapest RH server you can get is $349, which is dangerously close to Windows Server 2003 web edtion at $399.

Red Hat Network. $60 a year per system; gives you all errata and instant access to ISOs.

Do a bit of research, eh?

Red Hat Network. $60 per year per server or free if you fill out a survey, and the $60 level provides you with instant ISO access as well as all of the bugfixes.

Come on, people... do some research. Really. This information is pretty easy to find.

"I simply cannot bring myself to pay the up2date tax when apt-get is free and just plain works better."

Er, what? up2date is free. Red Hat requires you to register the system with Red Hat to obtain updates and fill out a a survey every few months to keep your system up to date.

If filling out a survey isn't your thing, or you have several systems to maintain, Red Hat provides unlimited access to errata, plus the newest release ISOs, for $60 a year per system. That's FIVE DOLLARS A MONTH. I'm sure you spend a heck of a lot more time than that "tracking down and trying to install release-specific RPMs." If your company can't afford to spend five dollars a month on updates for their servers, it has larger problems.

It honestly sounds like you haven't really researched your options. Do yourself a favor and go check out the purchase options for Red Hat errata. Seriously, $60 a year is a deal for access to errata plus the newest ISOs!

Redhat costs more than XP ???

Redhat Linux :
$179 Basic Edition

Windows XP Home Edition :
$172 (zipstorage.com)

Uh, I think the non-monpolist needs to lower the price a little.

From RedHat's License Page:

• 4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to
• increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

So the answer is, it is X dollars ($1500, $800, 350, $180, whichever product / service level you want) per year, per system. That may be competitive if you want or need business hours or 24-hour phone support, all the fancy certifications and other features you get with RHEL, but if you just want access to binary erratas for a 3-5 year product life span, that's not realistic pricing, IMHO.

Jason.

• 4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

Can RedHat enforce this considering the software they're selling me is under open source licenses?

If so, then it seems that the costs are per year, per server. For RHL ES, at $350/year/server, my modest 4 server shop would cost me $1400 USD/year, or over $2200 CAD/year. I just don't have the budget for this.

Really, all I want is access to errata. I don't need phone support, or email support, or any fancy RHN monitoring. Just let me download errata binaries so I can upgrade my servers and I'm happy. I'm willing to pay for that, but not to the tune of $2200 a year. There doesn't seem to be such a solution offered by RedHat.

Jason.

Redhat has training for RH-Enterprise AS here

Mind you it's just a 5 day course. Personally, as an RHCE, I'd like there to be an "Enterprise level" certification; I don't think a regular RHCE could just jump right into the Enterprise product line and utilize every new feature. There's a lot of stuff in the course that is just not encountered if you admin a small number of boxen, such as fail-over clustering with pirahna.

However, if the course is over $2800, I'd hate to see what the cert would cost.

There's a nice page here explaining the differences between normal and Enterprise versions.

Very useful for the suit to choose which Redhat is suited for him ;-)

I'd be more than happy to pay a reasonable amount ($50/yr/machine) for something like this.

How about $60?
Red Hat Network Purchase Information

Red Hat Network Basic service level: $60/year per system subscription

Red Hat Network Basic service provides software management, priority service, and access to Instant ISOs (full versions of Red Hat Linux) for individuals with one or more systems. A Basic subscription is required for each system supported on Red Hat Network. A Basic subscription to Red Hat Network provides:

• Email notifications of available updates (errata)
• Flexible scheduling of updates
• Delivery of the actual updated files (packages)
• Summaries of update results

However, I cannot believe that they don't offer some type of per incident support basis.
This topic just came up on the mailing lists, and they *do* offer per-incident suppport.
http://www.redhat.com/support/techsupport/producti on/INS_sod.html

Yes, if you want to pay $800 for each installation. Take a look at the license agreements for the relevant software. Lots of talk of subscriptions and audits.

Ayam 3d (3D modeling package)

Source-Navigator (Source code browser and more)

Insight (gdb GUI)

...does it run Linux?

I think you're misinformed. The KDE 3.1 packages for Red Hat are here. Besides, isn't it possible that this guy might prefer GNOME over KDE, or is GNOME also "crippled"? Actually, I shouldn't have said that. This is just going to turn into another off-topic flame-fest. Regardless, I don't understand why you insist he run KDE. I'd prefer he make that choice for himself.

He will have to mess with different configuration tools in different places and that sucks. (Or can I set IP-adresses, screen resolution, firewall settings, desktop colors and wallpaper in the same config center in RedHat?)

Have you actually tried Red Hat Linux? You can find all the configuration options on the start menu. For instance, to change the desktop background, click start menu, Preferences, Background. To change the screen fonts, click start menu, Preferences, Fonts. Seems pretty easy and consistent to me. If you want all of the options within one application, you can run GNOME Control Center, also available in the Preferences menu. I believe Bluecurve has the same control center option in KDE, but if not, it seems like a pretty silly reason to throw out Red Hat. Are you saying the whole distro is worthless because the system settings are in the start menu instead of a control center? (Rhetorical question; I think I already know your answer.)

it is inconsistent with all other distros

Since when do all desktops have to be identical to each other? Lindows and Lycoris also run heavily modified versions of KDE; are they trash, too?

causes RedHat to lag behind in availability of packages

Lag behind? They come out with a new release every six months, and if that's not enough, you can get the unstable packages here.

and makes bugreports from RedHat users worthless

I don't see why. The configuration of the desktop is different, but the code is same. For instance, Red Hat did not re-write the KDE CD Player for Bluecurve. When a Red Hat user finds a bug in kscd, the bug will be in all other distributions, as well.

Since when do we cheer up unecessary forks?

Bluecurve is not a fork; it's a repackaging. What Red Hat has done with KDE is similar to what Galeon has done with Mozilla, or what Apple's Safari has done with Konqueror. They've added code and changed the look a lot, but the foundation is still there. Or does this mean you think Safari is crap, too? It sounds like you think it's okay for others to modify KDE, but Red Hat can't.

Debian is as inconsistent as RedHat but has other advantages (apt-get)

Hmm. You complained about Red Hat lagging behind in package availability, but from what I hear, Debian is far worse. How long did it take Debian to come out with KDE 3.0 packages?

so does Gentoo.

Gentoo!? I thought we were talking about distros for newbies.

*ALL* the prejudices that I hear...

That you "hear"? Don't judge a distro until you've actually tried it.

on RedHat you do have to compile KDE 3.1 on no other major distro you have to do that!

This is simply not true. You can get them from the Rawhide links I posted above, or you can get them here. Just because you can't get them from kde.org doesn't mean you have to compile them yourself.

RedHat is not ready for the desktop, Linux is.

Well, to each his own. I can see why KDE purists might have a problem with Red Hat Linux, but for Linux newbies, it's one of the better distros out there. I think dj_paulgibbs should try several different distros and pick the one he likes best, not the one that has "pure KDE".

I think you're misinformed. The KDE 3.1 packages for Red Hat are here. Besides, isn't it possible that this guy might prefer GNOME over KDE, or is GNOME also "crippled"? Actually, I shouldn't have said that. This is just going to turn into another off-topic flame-fest. Regardless, I don't understand why you insist he run KDE. I'd prefer he make that choice for himself.

He will have to mess with different configuration tools in different places and that sucks. (Or can I set IP-adresses, screen resolution, firewall settings, desktop colors and wallpaper in the same config center in RedHat?)

Have you actually tried Red Hat Linux? You can find all the configuration options on the start menu. For instance, to change the desktop background, click start menu, Preferences, Background. To change the screen fonts, click start menu, Preferences, Fonts. Seems pretty easy and consistent to me. If you want all of the options within one application, you can run GNOME Control Center, also available in the Preferences menu. I believe Bluecurve has the same control center option in KDE, but if not, it seems like a pretty silly reason to throw out Red Hat. Are you saying the whole distro is worthless because the system settings are in the start menu instead of a control center? (Rhetorical question; I think I already know your answer.)

it is inconsistent with all other distros

Since when do all desktops have to be identical to each other? Lindows and Lycoris also run heavily modified versions of KDE; are they trash, too?

causes RedHat to lag behind in availability of packages

Lag behind? They come out with a new release every six months, and if that's not enough, you can get the unstable packages here.

and makes bugreports from RedHat users worthless

I don't see why. The configuration of the desktop is different, but the code is same. For instance, Red Hat did not re-write the KDE CD Player for Bluecurve. When a Red Hat user finds a bug in kscd, the bug will be in all other distributions, as well.

Since when do we cheer up unecessary forks?

Bluecurve is not a fork; it's a repackaging. What Red Hat has done with KDE is similar to what Galeon has done with Mozilla, or what Apple's Safari has done with Konqueror. They've added code and changed the look a lot, but the foundation is still there. Or does this mean you think Safari is crap, too? It sounds like you think it's okay for others to modify KDE, but Red Hat can't.

Debian is as inconsistent as RedHat but has other advantages (apt-get)

Hmm. You complained about Red Hat lagging behind in package availability, but from what I hear, Debian is far worse. How long did it take Debian to come out with KDE 3.0 packages?

so does Gentoo.

Gentoo!? I thought we were talking about distros for newbies.

*ALL* the prejudices that I hear...

That you "hear"? Don't judge a distro until you've actually tried it.

on RedHat you do have to compile KDE 3.1 on no other major distro you have to do that!

This is simply not true. You can get them from the Rawhide links I posted above, or you can get them here. Just because you can't get them from kde.org doesn't mean you have to compile them yourself.

RedHat is not ready for the desktop, Linux is.

Well, to each his own. I can see why KDE purists might have a problem with Red Hat Linux, but for Linux newbies, it's one of the better distros out there. I think dj_paulgibbs should try several different distros and pick the one he likes best, not the one that has "pure KDE".

I think companies should work smarter, not harder, to make a profitable business model based on something kinda like this.

I freely choose to make no money from my software work
"No they do not."

therefore everyone else must be denied the right to make money from software
I have never heard about Oracle being sued for including freesofware in their products?

Everyone has the right to make money from their work, in my understanding/opinion the GPL strongly hints anotherway of doing so. If others want to do it the traditional way, fair enough but others may opt for different techniques.

A last point : SCO is suing IBM, this does by no ways mean that IBM is guilty, at least until the trial is over.

NFS under Linux isn't there yet. It's unreliable under heavy load (eg. when saturating Gigabit ethernet). Linux NFS also has a very funny idea about RFCs, ie. it ignores them when it doesn't like what they say (NFS fragments packets in some cases when the RFC explicitly says not to).

NFS over TCP would also be nice. Linux has NFS over UDP only (in production code). Connection-based NFS gives a warm fussy feeling wrt. actually *knowing* about lost packets.

Multiple network cards are a pain, largely due to how Linux handles ARP. Routing table and ARP cache can contradict each other in certain situations (involving multiple network cards connected to the same switch, even on different subnets, caused by how Linux handles ARP requests).

The fact that the Linux packet filter doesn't track TCP sequence numbers is disconcerting. (This "feature" is used to allow TCP window scaling over NATted connections.)

In general, it seems that Linux networking tends to be rather sloppy about rules that concern security (TCP seq num) and interoperability (NFS frags) whenever it fits them, and don't care much about how other OSes cope with it. This mindset is almost Windowsian.

Actually, I think RedHat has this implemented pretty well.

I have Debian packages at penguinppc.org, as well as several mirrors (look at the link, folks), that work on sid i386/powerpc/ia64/alpha (woody and sarge backports coming soon), and will upload 4.3.0-0ds1 today (and hopefully -0ds2 by Wednesday). These will be the base for Branden's 4.3 work.

Mike Harris, RedHat's maintainer, has some RPMs for RawHide (I think, might be 8.0) here. Don't say we don't do anything. :)

Octave is a nice MATLAB clone, developed from chemical engineers in the beginning, but now used extensively in virtually any area that math is usefull.

Many packages have their open source counterparts: Octave for MATLAB, R-system for SPLUS (statistics algebra system), and so forth. But IMHO you raise another issue: you can use each of these packages to do whatever calculations you want, since all of them are extended in the C/Fortran end, i.e. they can use programs written in these languages. Custom code is readily integrated. And above all, the GNU Scientific Library. If you don't like or you don't trust the numerical solvers integrated in MATLAB, you can investigate the source in the GSL.

And yes, you can use all of these together. So, what is the question again?

When you sign up for RHN, you're given the option of uploading information about which packages you have installed. You can decline [1]. You won't get email about particular packages you have which need updating, but you can still use the update agent.

The update agent will still work because it polls the servers for which packages are current for your release [2] and compares that list to what you have installed, and the comparison is done locally.

[1] https://rhn.redhat.com/help/basic/register-system- profile.html
[2] https://rhn.redhat.com/help/basic/up2date-setup.ht ml#PACKAGES-TO-UPDATE

When you sign up for RHN, you're given the option of uploading information about which packages you have installed. You can decline [1]. You won't get email about particular packages you have which need updating, but you can still use the update agent.

The update agent will still work because it polls the servers for which packages are current for your release [2] and compares that list to what you have installed, and the comparison is done locally.

[1] https://rhn.redhat.com/help/basic/register-system- profile.html
[2] https://rhn.redhat.com/help/basic/up2date-setup.ht ml#PACKAGES-TO-UPDATE