Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat 7.0 Coming On Monday
the_quark writes: "According to this ZDNet story, RedHat will be rolling out a subscription update service with 7.0, which will be available by FTP on Monday." They're also announcing the "Red Hat Network" which essentially adds something like Debian's apt-get function that I've been using for a couple years now *grin*. BTW, has anyone played with gnome-apt? Not bad.
Now, the cost, of course to this is that with Debian, unless you run bleeding edge Debian with it's bugs and inproprieties is that you get about four to six month old software. That sucks. Sorry, Debian, but you need package pools BADLY.
M
It is a lot easier to shut off services now -- chkconfig will affect (x)inetd-based services now, so it's as simple as 'chkconfig rsh off'. FWIW.
But once you get used to apt, it's almost impossible to go back to RPM (and it's almost impossible to convert those RPMs into .debs), although I have to admit that dselect takes a good amount of getting used to. Then again, RedHat doesn't have a text-based package management UI, so it's hard to compare it to anything else. Gnome-apt is getting really good, though.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
Maybe it's just me, but parent should'nt be a troll. FreeBSD is, in alot of ways, nicer then RedHat. Better install (no X), more utils, and a faster boot. Then again, on Slashdot, if it not Linux, it's a Bad Thing(TM).
Life is a disease, sexually transmitted and fatal.
I've read /. for a while now and if your the leader (no matter what) you'll get bashed. You can be the best (RH may or not be the best) and you'll still get bashed, especially by the people that like #2.
At least the temporary ATAPI drivers for the Win2000 install have DMA enabled; Linux always uses PIO mode during the install (unless you hack the install disk with the IDE driver module for your chipset, maybe).
There are some damned good reasons for this -- some drives with some IDE controllers, mostly older controllers, will destroy data if you enable DMA. There are very good reasons to not enable DMA. I've learned about them through experience, with a hacked-up slackware install long ago, but some of those buggy controllers are still around.
OK, now I'll just anticipate your next response: don't enable it on those controllers. OK, what about buggy drives (I believe that Maxtor has a few around). How about bugs that only occur with one combination of a controller and drive? Or a specific controller, a specific master drive, and a specific slave? All of these conditions do exist.
</rant>
-30-
When /. announced 6.9beta, bero@redhat.com was down in the trenches, answering a lot about this question, among others. I would search for that article in the /. archive, then do a search on bero.
Redhat is not responsible for anything in regards to the LSB except the parts which they contribute. What I mentioned (and you eluded to) was that RH does not have the intrest in making it a success. The LSB will continue to go on with or without RH's full support. The reason for their weak-at-best LSB track record is purely self serving and short sighted. As I mentioned before, there are companies which are larger than all the Linux companies combined which have a very strong intrest in the success of the LSB.
You were probibly not in attendance at a certain Linux HA confrence where several participants heard the Redhat representative say that RH had no intrest in participating in anything which would lower their edge. The arrogance was thick and heavy. It dripped slowly and dangled off his chin like red jelly filling hanging from the doughnut filled mouth of officer friendly at the local crispy cream.
Redhat is very aware that the LSB makes it so that third party software companies will only have to port once to "LSB" and their app will run on _any_ LSB compliant distribution. However, what they want is to have these companies port to Redhat - they want to be the de facto standard
No one company will ever own linux. However, RH is, in many ways, acting like they do and it's very upsetting to many people.
Let's not forget that the great people and companies and institutions that offer this luxury, free to the users. If it weren't for the bandwidth and server donations, Debian couldn't justify offering the service at the cost it is now.
I was appalled to find that the RedHat 6.1 installer wasn't able to do a non-destructive repartition, nor did it play well with Windows after I did so by hand.
I took an NT machine, used partition magic to move NT over and installed 6.2 without incident. Trivial. Both boot flawlessly. This was a scsi system too.
KidSock
I once saw a download page for some open-source app criticizing RedHat with the usual cry of "doing nonstandard stuff!". The complaint? That RedHat had used a separate font server (XFS) instead of having the XFree server handle the fonts itself. /opt, never mind that /opt is NOT compatible with the Linux Filesystem Standard, which RH follows pretty closely.
Of course, anyone who took the time to do any research would note that this was the configuration that was RECOMMENDED by the XFree people, because it is more easily extensible and prevents the entire server from hanging when rescaling a font. But this guy had just jumped on the chance to dis Red Hat.
I even remember similar complaints when RH moved to Xwrapper, never mind that it was the STANDARD way to do things. People complain about RH moving KDE out of
I've gotten sick of hearing it. If we want to talk about evil Linux distros and commercialization, let's talk about the Mickey Mouse Logo people (Caldera).
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
Who says you have to buy it? You can go and download updates like everyone else does, or go and the CD installer and run the update. With everyone getting high speed access these days, ISOs shouldn't be that bad.
Brielle
The compiler is gcc 2.96 (which will become gcc 3.0). The kernel will be compiled with an older compiler (kgcc). At least, that's how Pinstripe (the beta) was.
-30-
The Bold new concept is having people pay for updates. Should have figured they'd try to milk their user base like a cash cow sooner or later...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
RedHat's not saying this, RedHat's marketing is. And since I know about 2 cents worth about marketing even though my company does it, I know enough to see it, apreciate the work it takes to differentiate my company using it, and relalize that my company needs it to be able to pay my wage, I keep my stupid opinions to myself...except for here at slashmouth
- real hackers don't have sigs -
I know that a 2.4.0-test(something) was included in the beta, as a "preview" technology. Stuff like iptables & friends were there, and it looked like glibc was compiled against 2.4 kernel-headers. Happy?
-30-
Bah, they're just trying to catch up to slackware.
.0 shipments?
Anways, what is it with RedHat? 4.0, 4.1, 4.2- and here's 5.0! 5.0, 5.1, 5.2- and here's 6.0! 6.0, 6.1, 6.2 -> 7.0? Are they scared of minor revision numbers, or are they only useful for correcting the egregrious flaws that are always present in RH's
I will never ever pay any penny for Linux software. PERIOD! Certainly as i know enough about linux to build my own systems/network.
Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not Richard Stallman!
OK. Time for two quick lessons. Number one: Redhat pays many excellent developers money so they can make the cool "free" software you like and still pay rent and for their kids health insurance. Redhat then must get money, so they must have something to sell. Number two: this is for priority access, not for any access. It's a service to make it easier for lusers to update their systems, and gives them access to priority servers that have sufficient bandwidth (which again costs money, see lesson one).
-30-
Posted by polar_bear:
I dunno - charging for it when Debian and Mandrake are already doing it for free is pretty damn bold, right? Heh. Never did like Red Hat anyway...I own five Linux boxen - Slack, Debian, Suse and Mandrake - not a Red Hat amongst them.
Thanx, will do.
pointy haired bosses need some illisoin of continuity when they invest their infrastructure to a operating system. It gives them a warm and fuzzy and brings Linux places where it couldn't go on it's own, except through the back door. When in Rome, you gotta wear a toga.
- real hackers don't have sigs -
More bloatware. Just what the linux community needs.
This release DOES include XFree4, and is fully compatable with the 2.4 kernel (correct glibc, compiler, etc.). The only reason that it isn't being shipped with 2.4 is that 2.4 is not released yet. If you want to (I wouldn't recommend it) you can download a prerelease 2.4 from the RedHat Rawhide directories and run it.
IPO is not a fucking verb.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Wait a second.
"The compiler is gcc 2.96"???
You mean it will have 2.96 also installed, right?
2.96 is being worked on heavily. It is not stable by any means, and the release is likely to be months away. (see the release criteria for an idea of the work left to do).
Yes, GCC 3.0 will be cool. A new standard compliant C++ library. A Java compiler (both to native and bytecode). A standard C++ ABI that will be adhered to (so you can link and dinamically link code written by any >=3.0 version). It WILL compile the Linux kernel correctly (Otherwise it won't be released, see the criteria). But none of this stuff is there, or is usable right now.
Which snapshot are they shipping? I'm sure the GCC team will love to have more bug reports, but not on an old snapshot whose bugs have been fixed.
GCC 3.0 is not ready for prime time. I don't know what RH is thinking. (AFAIK the GCC maintainers are not behind this)
(Note to zealots: If your platform is not a first tier or second tier platform, that doesn't mean they don't care, it just means that they will be relying on YOU to do the testing. See this, this, and all the intervining discussion. don't restart the flame war here)
The beta's been out a while, and based on their previous release schedule, I guessed long ago that 7.0 would come out in late September. No surprises at all.....
The kernel compiles fine with 2.95.x. Mine is, anyway. There were some old issues with 2.0.x that involved the old 2.7.x compiler underoptimizing and allowing some code that should have been optimized away exist anyway. 2.2.x and 2.4.x do not suffer from this problem, and patches exist against 2.0.x to solve the problem with that version.
I wonder if this subscription upgrading stuff has anything to do with RPM 4.0 which just came out. It is not supposed to be fully backward compatible so maybe they added some features which allow for more automated updates?
Would be nice... Took an entire summer to figure out how to get RH to boot to my 3rd ide controller. (Abit BP-6 MB w/ udma66 HD) Of course slackware did it straight out of the box. What really drove me nuts was that the RH boot disk I actually created during install would boot to the 3rd ide controller. Granted, no udma66, but at least it booted. Slackware ships with 2.2.16, RH with 2.2.14. Maybe difference in the kernel? -No, slackwre is smart enough to includee the udma kernel. Any questions on how to get linux ingeneral to see a drive on the 3rd or 4th controller, let me know...
I took an NT machine, used partition magic to move NT over and installed 6.2 without incident. Trivial. Both boot flawlessly. This was a scsi system too.
Wow, that sounds great. It's too bad that PartitionMagic costs $60! But I see that Caldera comes with Partition Magic for $29.95 on Outpost. Tempting!
-Waldo
"Mac OS '01 = Redhat '98"
Please, if you plan on using intelligent humor, atleast use proper syntax. You are making a comparison, not an assignment:
Mac OS '01 == Redhat '98
There that is better.....ohhh, I just shot myself in the foot.
Andy
"1 2 3 4 5 - unbelievable, that is my luggage combination!"
Hey there :) Just to clear something up - I was bitching about ZD Net's lack of reporting skills and their relance on overly strong words to make things sound better/worse than they really are :) I hope Red Hat does well in this new venture of theirs - I use Red Hat pretty much exclusively, myself. :)
Dave
'Round the firewall,
Out the modem,
Through the router,
Down the wire,
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
They certainly have the right to do anything in their power to make money. Every company does.
But as a customer, I have the obligation to find the best value, and this seems to remove Redhat from that category. I'm assuming support and everything else remains at the same charge.
________
afc@tonga:~$ dpkg --list | wc -l
1113
Talk about bloat now, heh <g>
--
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Now the sound drivers that came with my old PC Chips motherboard... THOSE were some terrible drivers. ;)
Within ethical reason, obviously.
________
I didn't see anywhere where they flat-out state that you should just turn plain-text passwords on, but they do do a little lobbying for why they think that could be a good idea:
- Same passwords for both Unix and NT there, instead of storing them in different password files
- The passwords are stored in the smbpasswd file, and the encrypted versions there aren't using terribly good encryption -- at least that's what I was able to glean from the docs.
:)
- They actually say "Hey, plain text passwords over the network aren't that big a deal, since you're probably using other services like telnet and ftp that use plain-text passwords"
- They have a Win9XPlaintext.reg registry file displayed pretty prominantly at the top of the docs too. I'm not sure if this is RedHat or the Samba team who added it, but it's references in a few Samba docs, so I'll guess Samba.
Just about all of the above came from ENCRYPTION.txt that came with my version of 2.0.6. They're pretty clearly not discouraging plaintext passwords, and someone (RedHat or samba?) put a big huge scary warning in the sample smb.conf file telling people to only enable encryption if they really really know what they are doing. Then again, I think people should only be running Samba if they know what they are doing anyway.I think Red Hat will be moving away from "versions" altogether, and simply offer the "Red Hat Linux Operating System" as a subscription. That's where the money is. For $10/mo I'd be more than content with a forever-super-fast evolving OS like GNU/Linux. That's why I use Debian' unstable branch at home - apt-get and *poof* latest of the latest. (for better or worse ...)
Sure, the technical concepts are as old as the internet, and have previously been successifully implemented by both Debian and commercial entities (IBM & MS for example), but the subscription service as a business model is brand new, and it's what Microsoft.net is all about, and it's what MMOG's are all about (massively multiplayer online games), and it's what Red Hat should be looking at. The days of shelf-software profits are drawing to an end, and they need to be providing a proactive-payment services, like Debian's apt-get, but to the corporations and others who seem to be more confident in "commercial software", for some semblance of security.
better question: will the install be secure by default??? Or can we expect piranah again? :p But seriously, anonymous ftp, web server, rpc, etc,etc,etc, have no real use on a desktop, to which I'm sure Red Hat has some market goals!
the only subscription I need is a little file called sources.list -- and it's free (is it just me or is debian the best kept secret in the Linux world?)
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Does RedHat 7 include SSH by default, now that the RSA patent expired?
wary.
Vidi, Vici, Veni
Actually, I've used gnome-apt for a while, and it works really great . . . hasn't crashed on me yet. It's great to see a good GUI for apt out there finally.
I am so sick of buying (or downloading) great packages, and then having to pay extra for some feature that they have...ie- Norton Antivirus, redhat update...Anyone else sick of this??
"sigs are for losers"
"Why gripe about it?"
Because, in general, people are a bunch of whinging bastards.
Simon
Simon
The real linux_penguin has Slashdot ID 101961. Anyone else is an impostor. Including Bruce Perens.
Because they provide me with relatively stable, cheap, extensible operating system that I understand and enjoy using. I think somewhere the movement against a sub-standard, expensive, closed-source OS turned into a movement agains any operating system that you have to pay for.
Redhat provides a good product, and (perhaps now) a useful service, so wny not return the effort with a few dollars. To some people, it's worth that to make use of their service, even if they can find the same thing for free elsewhere with a little work.
Do you pay for running water, or do you collect rainwater in your cistern?
Sigh.
I've been using redhat on a machine with very little hard drive. Therefore I didn't install gnome or any of that stuff. Guess what? upd2date cannot be installed because its dependencies are not met.
So, I can't even run up2date in text mode until I install the whole gnome.
Won't somebody think of the text-only users???
I think they are doing 7.0 because the're falling behind with respect to the version numbers of other distibutions.
Mandrake 7.1
Slackware 7.1
SuSE 7.0
Red Hat 6.2
Turbo Linux 4.0
Turbo really needs to pick up the pace :~)
KidSock
I dont actually disagree with you on this. My point is that they dont always equate, and that with knowledge its possible to get a genuine 'bargin', without it most people pay as much as they can afford in the hope of getting quality. sometimes they get it.
Do yourself a favor, don't read the comments.. it's just going to piss you off -- with cluelessness being at an all time high around here.
Then again, it doesn't help when there's wrong assumptions and statements in the article summary itself.
The beta, Pinstripe (6.9.5), has gcc 2.96 (20000724).
-30-
Heh heh
--Giving to trolls for the benefit of us all
Come on people, show some intelligence. Windows update isn't free, it's just paid for in a different way.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
The version of aptitude from unstable is *the* front end to apt. "*The*" as in "the best".
According to 1010011010, 7.0 has a usb-to-ethernet driver included for the netgear dongle (and other similar ones as well?).
... ) not to mention easily installed physically with a gentle push, they're great for temp. networks esp, if the machines don't have internal cards already. If they do, I wonder if there's any reason they wouldn't work fine as a 2nd ethernet port as if you simply had two cards ... eh?
I just wanted to smile happily and join in the joy at that. Those stupid USB-only machines will soon bend to the will of the Linux kernel and the various distros as drivers become available for printers, scanners, and (importantly) ethernet connections. Considering that USB-ethernet controllers are cheap and everywhere (no, not as cheap as cards, obviously, but under $30 bucks and no reason they shouldn't drop under $20
simon
"Hey Carlito, r'membah me? Benny Blanco from the Bronx!"
Hmm... well if you install *everything* in the beta version you eat up about 2GB of space... it came on two CD's...
But, as you say, you don't have to install everything.
>it's a new visual basic compiler. we all know how
>much linux users love VB, it was the next logical
>step.
Can I use my Windows runtime .dlls with it?
.signature: Command not found
With Red Hat subscription they will have people serving up to demand. What's that mean? That means security, pretty themes, new email clients and bulletins about all the stuff that people find interesting, all in one package. If I want to find stuff on Debian, I have to KNOW what I'm looking for, by name pretty much. With the Red Hat update service, I suspect they will have recommendations of themes and of email clients and all that crap. And that's pretty cool when you don't know what you're doing. When you're a techie, that's not something you need or want, when you get towards "expert" or "pro" classification, your view of the field becomes somewhat ascew to that of the average-joe.
although, it's not quite the same thing (maybe they have plans to change it...), but isn't mandrakes just to supply updates to programs? or even the kernel? (i am a mandrake user, but i don't use the update program much).
but, it could be easily altered to be more like apt-get should they so choose to do so in the future (i hope they do).
-------
-------
"don't smoke, don't drink, don't fuck
at least i can fucking think"
Minor Threat
RH7.0 will have the latest stable 2.2 kernel, although it will be "2.4 ready", so you'll be able to upgrade to kernel 2.4 once it's ready (and it won't be ready in a long time).
As for KDE2, no it won't have it. KDE2 isn't even out, even though it's due in early October.
I'm really not sure if Mdk7.2 will ship with 2.4 -- it will have an optional pre-test-kernel, but it certainly won't be default. 7.2 beta2 is already out, so the final version shoudln't be that far away. I think they're basically waiting for KDE2 final. Mdk7.2 will also have new features like a graphical boot process.
--
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
Let's stop criticizing them for the wrong reasons, and start praising them for continuing to prove that the open source method of software development can work on both fronts.
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
Now if you buy the software like a magazine subscription, you can write it off in the current year as it is consumed. No bookkeeping hassles, and it lets you knock dollars off your taxes quicker.
This is partly why Microsoft's Open Licensing program is popular with businesses.
they offer CD mailings too
I don't think this should be marked "Flaimbait". The opinion is a little colorful but that's all it is.
Actually I tend to agree. I do use 6.2 at work and KDE and GNOME are a little thick. I think it's odd that they're making Windows for UNIX. I don't run it. I prefer WindowMaker.
KidSock
I wasn't aware that the Windows installer -- on the other hand -- is able to do a non-destructive repartition of any existing Linux installs, and that the newly-installed Windoze 95/98/SE/NT/Whistler/Whatever would play nicely if you were to do that by hand.
---
I will excerpt.
Our business may not succeed because open source software business models are unproven
We have not demonstrated the success of our open source business model, which gives our customers the right to freely copy and distribute our software. No other company has built a successful open source business. Few open source software products have gained widespread commercial acceptance partly due to the lack of viable open source industry participants to offer adequate service and support on a long term basis. In addition, open source vendors are not able to provide industry standard warranties and indemnities for their products, since these products have been developed largely by independent parties over whom open source vendors exercise no control or supervision. If open source software should fail to gain widespread commercial acceptance, we would not be able to sustain our revenue growth and our business could fail.
Our reliance on the support of Linus Torvalds and other prominent Linux developers could impair our ability to release major product upgrades and maintain market share
We may not be able to release major product upgrades of Red Hat Linux on a timely basis because the heart of Red Hat Linux, the Linux kernel, is maintained by third parties. Linus Torvalds, the original developer of the Linux kernel and a small group of independent engineers are primarily responsible for the development and evolution of the Linux kernel. If this group of developers fails to further develop the Linux kernel or if Mr. Torvalds or other prominent Linux developers, such as Alan Cox, David Miller or Stephen Tweedie, were to join one of our competitors or no longer work on the Linux kernel, we will have to either rely on another party to further develop the kernel or develop it ourselves. We cannot predict whether enhancements to the kernel would be available from reliable alternative sources. We could be forced to rely to a greater extent on our own development efforts, which would increase our development expenses and may delay our product release and upgrade schedules. In addition, any failure on the part of the kernel developers to further develop and enhance the kernel could stifle the development of additional Linux-based applications.
We may not be able to effectively assemble and test our software because it consists largely of code developed by independent third parties over whom we exercise no control, which could result in unreliable products and damage to our reputation
The scarcity of software applications for Linux-based operating systems could prevent commercial adoption of our products
Our products may not gain widespread commercial adoption until there are more third-party software applications designed to operate on Linux-based operating systems. These applications include word processors, databases, accounting packages, spreadsheets, e-mail programs, Internet browsers, presentation and graphics software and personal productivity applications. We intend to encourage the development of additional applications that operate on Linux-based operating systems by attracting third-party developers to the Linux platform, by providing open source tools to create these applications and by maintaining our existing developer relationships through marketing and technical support for third-party developers. If we are not successful in achieving these goals, however, our products may not gain widespread commercial acceptance and we may not be able to maintain our product sales growth.
We may not be able to generate revenue from sales of Official Red Hat Linux if users can more quickly download it from the Internet
Now please read their financial statements.
I'm not knocking Red Hat, but people need to stop thinking that they are the shining example of Linux business. They aren't, yet.
By default, weird inetd daemons like fingerd and telnet are open to security threats Well - the default workstation config doesn't install inetd. On top of that, RedHat 7.0 uses xinetd instead of inetd for improved security. If the newbie is clueless enough to put up a server with everything loaded on it despite the numerous FAQs and warnings, I don't have a lot of sympathy and DON'T blame RedHat.
You'd be suprised newbies don't even know what files goes where (in the file system), and RPM does all the job of copying files to these relevant directories. I was once a newbie, and I don't deny that I didn't use RPMs. Yes, they may be convinient, but that's what made me an idiot with the file system structure. I'd prefer that newbies get forced to download compressed binaries and get them installed in the right places by themselves. Imagine, I have a friend who dosen't even know how to move/copy/rename files! Anyway, that's how I started using THE computer... I was forced to use MS-DOS. Well I won't comment any further. I'd just wait for RH7 and have a close look at it first.
I don't why people emphasize this point about Slackware being difficult. It is not significantly more difficult than RedHat, just different.
On anothe note, apt-get is really the shit, but gnome-apt still has some rough edges to be smoothed out.
--
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
Can anyone tell me whether Red Hat 7's distribution of gcc 2.96 will be configured to use libstdc++-v3? Or whether libstdc++-v3 will be installed with the gcc RPMs at all?
Actually, Debian does support older versions, but even 2.0 is from a couple years ago. So, anything in the 1.* range is quite ancient in Linux standards.
The biggest problem seems to be the quest to have the highest version #, maybe trying to impress people without PC knowledge that, this 7.0 version is so much better than this measily 2.2 version.
Run through all the distros, all around 6-7. Even Windows doesn't update as often as some of these distros do. Usually, the only major version # is for a major update. And I seriously doubt that this will be seen as a major update in the eyes of many RedHat users.
Sykotyk
"I'd rather not know the answers, than not know the questions." - Hezh
Yes, exacly, please mod this up. Saying that Microsoft has been giving away updates free while RedHat has started charging for them is a troll, not interesting nor insightful.
$189 for Win2K and free service packs and critical updates that are virtually inaccessible the first day they are released and require a reboot; compared to $70 for RedHat (well, that's what 6.1 went for, not sure about 7.0) unless you want to download it for free and forego support and then upgrades and bugpatches are some subscription price for access to high-priority, high availability downloads unless you want to download from the regular 'public' servers in which case it is free.
Rod Serling must be turning over in his grave.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
I dunno, could have been the Via chipset, but my box crashed and burned with the drivers on the CD I was shipped. Updated drivers fixed the problem, but shipping drivers with such a bad bug is unacceptable in my book.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
RedHat's OS comes installed with loads of crap. It's becoming more like a bloatware than a good piece of O/S bundled with *just the right tools*. Many newbies won't even know whats happening during the packages installation, and they just load everything, like httpd, inetd, etc. By default, weird inetd daemons like fingerd and telnet are open to security threats, and their installations are getting larger and larger (if I'm not wrong, RH6 was almost 600mb huge, while RH5 was about 200-300.) Who knows what they have for us in RH7? Lastly, I hate to think but it makes linux users lazy with all the bloatware and RPM. People are lazy to download software and compile them, and I see lots of people just send mails to linux mailing lists with questions answered by millions of FAQs people took PAINS in writing.
Slow down, yoda boy, or hardly can we understand you.
--
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
Most organisations I dealt with were run by the suits who would always wait for the physical media to arrive before applying updates, even if these were critical security and device-driver fixes that should have been applied yesterday. Those run by someone knowledgeable pulled the pathces off an FTP server somewhere, and had the patches inplace that day.
Since the turnaround for receiving physical media was at least a month after the release of a major patch, security and other critical fixes were very late to be applied, judging by some of the support calls I had to field. I can envisage the same sort of thing happening here, with organisations waiting until the CD comes appears before installing any security fixes.
Well, the script kiddies will be pleased!
There is widespread use of Windows without _it_ being able to detect and work around existing os's on the target system ... it is bending over just a little too far to make linux too much of a "give it a quick try" on yer existing system to see if you like it. You wont, not just like that, its not that simple. If you have a _need_ though, then you might read up on linux and _plan_ to install it, spend some time etc otherwise nah.
Mac OS '01 == Redhat '98
Don't forget to escape the apostrophies...
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
>Will Enlightenment finally run faster?
Red Hat 7 will include the latest Helix GNOME [aka GNOME 1.2]. This is recent enough to not include Enlightenment, which has been dumped in favour of the smaller and mroe integrated Sawmill. Sawmill is configured through the GNOME control center, and there is near nill duplication between GNOME and Sawmills functionality. As it should be.
>Will Creative release Windows drivers that don't
> crash your system every time you attempt to play
> a sound?
Creative drivers: Both my ISA Soundblaster 16 and my Live 128 Platinum work fine in either Mandrake 7.1 or Red Hat 6.2.
>Will Samba be upgraded to run in Windows 2000
>networks?
Yes.
Some genius is gonna mirror Redhat's site, and create his own freely downloaded mirror site. And the problem will be solved.
I don't see a problem with what they're doing, they're charging you to access their server, not to pay for the software. But, I do think this idea will bomb.
That's like, "Oh, Windows ME is out, let's all run to the store and hand over 50 dollars." If you like paying for your OS, you've obviously missed the Linux boat.
"I'd rather not know the answers, than not know the questions." - Hezh
You know as well as I do that there's about 2 people in the world that have bought a Linux desktop system and thought "damnit, I've gotta get me some Windows on here" that didn't know how to go about doing it.
Further, to have a goal to only be as good as Windows is quite unfortunate. I think we should be (and are) shooting a little higher than that.
-Waldo
I've got rpm-4.0-0.66 installed on my (pinstripe beta) Red Hat system, and I'd love to know how to do apt-get type stuff with it. The Rice LUG is choosing a distribution tomorrow night for our installfest on the 30th, and being able to tell newbies, "Type this one command, and you're assured that all security fixes are installed" is a pretty big selling point.
p dates/current/*/*.rpm" works, sort of... but it downloads the entire file on every single RPM before it decides whether or not to upgrade it, even when the file name and file header data should indicate that no upgrade is to be made. This makes that command worthless for dialup connections. I've got an enhancement request "bug" submitted to Red Hat tonight, but they aren't going to have a fix out by the time we need to start burning Debian CDs.
Yeah, "rpm -Fvh http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/distributions/redhat/u
So, is there any other way (short of paying $$$ for many access licenses to a non-clogged up2date server) for us to give newbies a "one command security update" for Red Hat or Mandrake?
If that's insightful, check this out:
The two services are actually completely opposite each other. Microsoft makes you buy the software in the first place, pay for every major upgrade, and gives you SOME bugfixes for free.
Red Hat on the other hand, will distribute the software for free, including major upgrades and bug fixes. If you'd like access to their well tested, bugfixed, signed bugfixes and updates on a high priority, high availability basis, then you can pay for such a service. These same bugfixes and updates will still be available for free on Red Hat's site and all of their mirrors.
Red Hat's way of doing business hasn't gotten any less friendly to their customers, and they aren't forcing anyone into ridiculous licensing schemes like some other companies we've been reading about here on slashdot.
You're not in the twilight zone, and nothing is backwards. Just look at the pretty GNU and repeat to yourself "It's...OK".
RedHat is actually going to charge money
for people downloading rpm's??
So what always has been for free, you will
have to pay for then?
How about the mirror's?? are they charging too??
I'm not ammused. I remember a posting from Linus
years ago on April's 1st Fools day. He said
that the linux kernel would not be released
under the GPL anymore, and now you would have to
pay for downloading it. Luckily it was a joke.
Actually everybody who read that message immediately knew it was bogus.
So RedHat will start a subscription service
where people can automaticly "up2date" their
RedHat Linux system. And the fee's for that
will becharged and chashiered automaticly.
Wow thats something that frightens me.
HEY PEOPLE, Linux is a FREE OpenSource OS. Don't
let yourself be fooled by RedHat!!
I sure hope its a joke, like Linus once did. If not, I forsee a very good time for the other Linux
distributors.
I will never ever pay any penny for Linux software. PERIOD! Certainly as i know enough
about linux to build my own systems/network.
Robert
It's not outrageously funny but rather egregiously deceitful. RedHat didn't start any version bumping, perhaps Mandrake or SuSE did, but not RH. And in any case, RH never bumped as high as Volkerding, so I think it is really childish on his part.
--
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
Mandrake and Suse are based on RedHat. >:p
gee ok apologies for my mistake 'coz I am no X guy, and I only do servers on Linux. But that's about it. I've already mentioned that newbies don't know what's happening during package selection, and they simply just load everything just to be on the safe side. (Think of yourself as a newbie, would you understand what "inetd", "xmms" or even X was? I wouldn't have known wat all these stuffs were)
As an end-user, not many actually bother finding out what's on their system and go around reading HOW-TOs. People have been telling them Linux is save -- and they assume its safe anyway. A false sense of security is worse than a sense of insecurity.
I know a bunch of kids who are enthusiastic to set up .COMs selling shell accounts and such, and they just grab a copy of redhat and install the server, and 3 months later, got their box compromised. Is redhat gonna make these potential Linux users lose their confidence in them? Well, it's up to them to secure their products by default. Let the users learn to install additional things they want; let them LEARN the way things should be.
Since Linus has effectively endorsed reiserfs as the next native file system for Linux, support for it will be required in the near future. Suse and Mandrake support it already, albeit in an "experimental" form. In any case, we will all shortly begin migrating.
If Red Hat releases now without reiserfs, we will have to wait for another release cycle. If they do release reiserfs now, it might damage their reputation as the rock-solid business Linux.
HP and Sun put a lot of effort into journaling file systems... Sun developed their own journaling extensions to UFS in Disksuite (in addition to Veritas), and HP simply liscensed Veritas as an HP-UX core component.
Red Had needs to show that it is expending the same level of consideration and care in bringing reiserfs into the installer and integrating it tightly into the OS.
The optimum time to do this would be 7.0. This is premature.
Folks, if we don't push LSB, RedHat will win a market that will become so small it will be irrelevant. Their market share is shrinking and all they have left is some LSB incompatibilities to anchor their business on. People want to port to "Linux" once and not have to worry about what RedHat does to break compatibility in the next release. The Microsoft analogies are not a joke. They want to apply those practices to an open source world, but what they don't realize is that they're not setting a new standard. They're widening the chasm. If we encourage RedHat's actions Linux will become just another OS that couldn't compete with MS.
I wonder if RH is going to put any consideration into security this time? 6.0 wasn't exactly the most secure OS in the world... or do we not want "newbies" to be securE?
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
I'm thinking the name should either be changed to Redsoft or Microhat..... take your pick. :)
"medal not in the affairs of sys admins, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup"
"user by force, root by attrition" to email remove the NO~SPAM
Or does EVERYBODY have to try to make some kind of subscription service for EVERYTHING?
I mean geeze.
It's just a glorified product service contract thingee.
Mike
"I would kill everyone in this room for a drop of sweet beer."
any operating system as far as I can throw a rock at them. You would be mad as hell if you would blindly install the newst updates RH presents to you, or any other update source for that matter. Linux as Stable and Good(tm) as long as you have put time into installing the system and carefully select only the packages you need. Personally I would never use a default installation with "most" of the functionality and configuration compliance. A good operating system is a system which you understand, control and configure ONLY for the tasks you need. Even Windows could be good OS if it conforms to these criteria.
-Danny
Okay, i don't know if you are serious or not, but stop for a second and think about what you are saying. Lets play it from the other side of the wall, shall we?:
"I tried for the first time, to install Windows SE alongside RedHat this past weekend. I was appallwd to find that the Windows SE installer wasn't able to do a non-destructive repartition, nor did it play well with RedHat after i did so by hand. I tried and tried to get it to work, but i couldn't find any documentation in the box that came with Windows, or on Microsoft's Knowledgebase! I eventually uninstalled Windows and apologized to the victim, my girlfriend, who is now somewhat less than impressed with Windows.
Of course its my fault that I couldn't get things running right, but this seems like a no-brainer fo Microsoft. They need to get the rights to (or make) a disk optimizing utility and a non-destructive repartitioning utility. So here's my question: does Windows ME incorporate this? For folks like my girlfriend that just want to try Windows, not go whole-hog, the SE setup is ludicrous. As a 5-year Windows user, I should have known how to do this. As a brand-new user, there's no possible way that she would be able to install Windows. How can we hope to get more widespread use of Windows without comfortable, flexible, reasonable installers?"
see how stupid you sound now? peace
Its spelt "L-I-N-U-X", but pronunced as "Free Beer"
Maybe someone could givve me a hand,
I'm using Redhat and am trying to install glide.
I'm using 6.2 , I install all the glide frivers just fine, but the But the Glide_GDK (or something, its for developers, but they say I need it for Mesa) just says "Will not install" for some reason.
The teast 3dfx works fine in X, but won't run from a command propmt, it gives me an error that it can't find my V3 board.
Then I try to install a game (soldgier of Fortune) to run in X, but it gives me an error that is can't find my openGL software, what do I need to do?
Could someone give me their e-mail that has experience with this so I can get some help?
Thanks
If redhat is the Linux Micosoft what does that make Mandrake??? ~~ V O D A K ~~ Cleveland, Ohio, USA icq : 30242206 \\// http://www.nacs.net/~vodak/
Actually, I was just...joking
Andy
"1 2 3 4 5 - unbelievable, that is my luggage combination!"
Many other people are complaining about this 7.0 release not having enough of "new software" like 2.4.0 kernel, so think the jump in the version number isn't useful, thus it should be called 6.3.
Here's what I think : I've been testing Pinstripe (the 6.9.5 public beta) and the latest rawhide release and there are really a lot of major changes!
Isn't this enough? I mean stop saying "they're dumb, 2.4.0 will be out soon" since there will probably be enough problems just with the new gcc, why break things even more? Anyway, ask any one of the kernel maintainers if they think you should use 2.4.x on production systems when it comes out... the answer will be "no". It's the same with kde2, gnome 1.4... just wait for RedHat 7.1 or 7.2 which should have a solid core and all of those new packages.
Personnaly, I know I will be messing with RedHat 7.0 on my laptop and my other home systems... but I also know I won't be installing it here at work on production systems right away. Everyone else is free to do whatever they want...
Matthias <ms at asi.fr>
Sounds great, but I just got 6.2. I'd prefer to get some use out of that release first. I just really hope they got rid of that Anaconda installer (or at least provide an alternative). I've been trying to get 6.2 on an older box and keeps crapping out due to lack of memory.
--
Já temos teorias conspirátorias o suficiente por parte dos gringos aqui, não é necessário que brazucas também o façam com os produtos da terra. A Conectiva emprega dois dos mais competentes "hackers" brasileiros, o Cláudio e o Alfredo Kojima, e não merece esse tipo de coisa. Além disso, eles pagam o Andrew Clausen (na Austráia!) como mantenedor do GNU parted. Acho que isso fala bem alto, não?
E por outro lado, qual a diferença entre o que eles fazem e o que a Mandrake faz? Ou a SuSE? Pense nisso...
--
Information wants to be beer, or something like that.
Hmm,
The thing that really swung me over to linux was when I wanted to do a dual boot install - Win 98 + RedHat 6.1 on my laptop (a recently bought second hand P133, 40Mb RAM, 1.6Gb disk).
It came with a buggered copy of Windows 95 on it.
Having used linux before I knew I had to partition the disk. Win 95 had thrown system files everywhere so FIPS[1] was no use. Hmm, nothing for it but to pretend I'd had a disk crash and do a complete repartition, reformat reinstall.
[1]FIPS is the non destructive disk partitioner which works providing that Windows hasn't done something stupid[2] and rendered the disk impossible to modify.
[2]This could be approximated to hasn't been booted yet.
Step 1: Drop down to fdisk, create my 500Mb FAT partition. Leave space for Linux, swap and shared later on.
Step 2: Install Win 98.
STep 3: Discover that it is impossible to install Win98 without a working CD rom drive or a copy on the hard disk. There is no way to make the PCMCIA network card go without installing Win 98.
Step 4: Install DOS from floppy, attempt to pull Win 98 over a serial connection. Give up due to being very slow.
Step 5 : Give up, insert Linux boot floppy, spend 20 minutes installing RedHat 6.1. Let it correctly autodetect all of my Hardware and set up LILO to dual boot to the dos partition. Create a boot floppy.
Step 6: Use ftp, mirror the Win 98 CD to the hard disk.
Step 7: Boot to dos disk, install Win 98, watch it destroy the boot sector.
Step 8 : Rebuild boot sector with LILO - working computer.
Conclusion, the correct way to install Windows 98 onto a machine with no CDROM drive is to install Linux first.
Microsofts installer is good at detecting hardware.
However, it does not allow me to partition the disk (to install a fresh dual boot system I had to repartition after the first install of Win98), it will not share the boot sector.
What we need are manufacturers to create dual boot systems by default and sell those. That gets over the inital difficulties with Linux (i.e. that it tends to destroy your Windows partitions unless you are careful).
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
mmm yeah but what is a distro for if not packaging and testing? My debian 2.2 is a far better system than my RH 6.2 in many ways.. I guess you love chasing down rpms and dependencies.. while I just do an apt-get install xfmail and watch quality software do its job.. can you ugrade your entire os with one command?
http://tinyurl.com/globalwarmingisascam
Must there be a god damn it distribution war everything when one of the distributions comes out with a new release?
Why is it that so many of the +5 moderated messages that I see start with something like:
Go ahead. Mark this as flamebait. Mark me down, bring up the same complaints already voiced in other threads as if they're unique...but
One good reason is that T1/T3 lines are not free. A properly designed, paid service allows the provider to provision adequate bandwidth and server resources for the predicted load. The problem with "free" services is that they are often overwhelmed by the demand and there is no money to upgrade the capacity of the service.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
The ZDNet article mentions it will come with a new compiler. Is this just a new version of gcc, or something else more noteworthy?
This is false, since the very first Conectiva distros they were just translations to portuguese of Red Hat Linux.
Now the guys at Conectiva will get RH 7, translate, screw it up in a multitude of ways and change the auto-update system so that it only connects to Conectiva's servers. And we thought they would _create_ something. *grin* Do expect Conectiva 6 (current version is 5.x) to be out in a month or so. And why I'm not surprised they won't have to develop their own marvelous packaging system ?
This network thing they've come up doesn't look like such a bad idea, in theory at least. It could turn out to be a crock, but otherwise my company will probably subscribe, as long as the fee is not outrageous. One of the reasons that a lot of closed-source folk don't embrace the open-source business model is becuase they claim that no revenue can be generated. Redhat has come up with another way to make money off of their open-source product. It's good to see that.
Cheers
<high-level position here>
<name of stupid small company here>
Windows updates are only usefull when you're running windows. And when you're running windows, you've payed for it. Payed for windows AND the windows updating service.
Well at least that's the theory.......
and SuSE beat them to the punch, too, FWIW...
If violence isn't solving your problems, you're not using enough of it. - MAJ Misato Katsuragi
From what I'm reading, Red Hat Network is NOTHING like apt-get
Sure, it lets you simply get updates from a recognised source.
But it's not free.
I can apt-get anything I want for my Debian system, without paying someone (other than my ISP) for it.
I could be on the Red Hat Network for a year, paying a monthly subscription fee, for which I don't get a promise of quality, regular updates, or anything other than being able to say "Hey, I run Red Hat Linux, and I'm on the Red Hat Network."
Reminds me of the Microsoft Network. Abso-fscking-lutely useless.
I know which distribution I'll be using.
*sniff* *sniff*
Do I smell potato?
So that 7.2 will have the stable version of 2.4.x, and the newest (working?) X 4.0.x, and quite possibly SSH. Remember folks, RedHat.0 versions usually stink, and the RedHat.2 versions are good.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Gorkman
You have no clue what you're talking about. SuSE is NOT based on Redhat.
About the subscription service, it seems everybody is doing the Helix nowadays. But Helix itself is poised to allow updates of the entire distribution (not only GUI), so won't a paid service like that become moot?
Hmmm, and I thought you had to buy windows to use their update.
And no one says that Redhat's update services is exclusively paid.
Red Hat Inc. next week will announce a bold new concept in the provision of its Linux software to users.
.1 and .2 release, and I hope they're successful, but I *really* wish ZD Net wasn't so bloody stupid. No other way to put it. Most of the stuff I read there is drivel. Ugh, it bothers me so much when someone starts an argument by saying, "But on ZD Net I read that ..." Absolutely infuriating. So when they say that Red Hat's new subscription service is a "bold new concept", I can't help but be offended. I use Red Hat exclusively, but I wish they'd step up and tell these people not to write things that are blatant lies. How long has the "bold new concept" been used for Debian's distribution? Much longer than Red Hat Networks, which has been around for ... oh, wait, it's coming this Monday, so it isn't even here yet.
Bold new concept? Don't get me wrong - I love Red Hat and buy every
Dave
'Round the firewall,
Out the modem,
Through the router,
Down the wire,
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Small business does too.
I have come to hate these talks with my boss every half a year. Each and every time RedHat is releasing a new version I am going to disturb him with (what he thinks) is irrelevant details.
He is not exactly entusiatic about these linux machines I keep running here and there. He would certainly prefer to run Windows like everyone else, but as I have told him: They're cheap and they're doing the job - flawlessly. So they stay. He even tries to ignore that once a while a new one pops up somewhere on our network. But those half-yearly "boss-I-need-a-few-bucks" talks is humilitating for me and just plain irritating for him.
So this subscription model will require a once-and-for-all decision about running linux or not, and then our financial department will take care of the rest. That's the way it should be !
Because 2.4 is going to need a while to be considered 'stable'. On top of that you just dont slap a brand new kernel into a distro without more 'real' world testing. On top of that 7.0 has been built to take full advatage of the 2.4 kernel when it does become stable. And a note to all you debian users who choose to dog redhat. Do you use the linux kernel? Do you use gnome? Well who do you think keeps Alan employed and who do you think is paying for the Gnome development. Dont bite the hand that feeds you and fuck apt! You want to see something that is better than Apt? Then take a look at *BSD ports and packages collection.
Most of you seem to know this, but others are acting like this is the end of the world or something. While I'm not overly thrilled about some of RedHats decisions, the network update is NOT a big deal-
Do you REALLY think that ONLY Network subscribers will be able to update their installs? Look at the past and get a grip. Years ago, you could go and purchase a RH CD, OR download it for free. TODAY, you can purchase RH 6.2 or download it...for free. This isn't likely to change.
A subscription service is a GOOD idea for some people- dedicated bandwidth for subscribers. Does that mean the 'free' update servers will get less monitoring and bandwidth? Maybe, but I live right down the road from RH and their servers are STILL slow when major updates or releases come out..no big deal. If I could receive a quarterly update CD, and CD or guaranteed bandwidth for getting new releases at a reasonable cost, I might think about buying it..note the _reasonable cost_ part, that's the only potential problem here. I'd give RH $100/year as an individual for quarterly CDs and guaranteed updates and releases, but more than that I'll contuinue to just get it for free.
If they price this as mentioned(according to usage, size of company etc), this is a GOOD THING for some people-the only 'problem' is whether or not they will offer 'personal' subscriptions that aren't insanely priced. We'll see.
Scott
Unix Developer, Admin and Linux Freak/Geek at Large
Hey, the way RedHat does versioning, they're going to be up to 98 in no time. Maybe we'll see a RedHat 2000 someday!!!
I'm on a chair.
Mac OS '01 = Redhat '98
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
I'm surprised I would think that Corel would come up with one of these kind of ideas well before it got into a Linux real Linux Company
Anybody ever seen windowsupdate.microsoft.com Sounds like a pretty similar service if you ask me. Except for this one little thing: Microsoft gives it away, and RedHat is going to make you pay for it.
This just can't be. I must be in the Twilight zone! Everything has gone backwards!
I'm just hoping the Red Hat Network has better commercials than the Microsoft Network.
Anyone know more about this? Will it be the same mess as when we went from 4.2 to 5.0? That was a real mess.
Personally, I don't like appeals to the moderator. They are noise to normal readers.
If I get moderator points, I ignore the calls and go to the real content or I can even get biased against the post.
Have some courage. If you have opinions that you feel will be contested by the Slashdot police, state them bravely or shut up, but don't ask mercy.
__
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
im too lazy too look, but if they had automatic updates, that would really be cool. Well.......until someone cracked the update server. Now that would be some funny shit. I'll stick with OpenBSD 2.7 if RH doesn't mind =)
Chaos, Mayhem, and Destruction: Not
Oh great, release it during the week when I'll end up missing class rearranging my box to upgrade. Of course, I'm not sure if this is any worse than a major release on a weekend, in which case I'd spend a good deal of my weekend sitting in a dimly-lit room tinkering with my computer... oh wait, I do that anyway.
On the other hand, judging roughly on the beta that they put out a month or two ago ("Redhat 6.9"), I'm not so sure I'll be bothering with Redhat 7. There comes a time in every Linux-user's life when they must remove Redhat from every box they own and replace it with Debian, and this may very well be my time.
and like all previous versions of Red Hat, you'll get to have rsh, rexec and all those other worthless security problem inetd daemons enabled by default.
This isn't true at all. Red Hat Linux 7 does NOT enable any of them by default. 6.2 didn't enable them all by default.
Now that we can ship a secure replacement, we would have no reason whatsoever to enable them by default on fresh installations, and we aren't doing it.
wu-ftpd is still there if I'm not mistaken
Yes it is, and it's the right choice. Yes, it has had some security problems. Name an alternative that didn't have them. Remember the early days of ProFTPD (the only viable alternative IMO)? Remember the fact that the most recent root exploit related to an sprintf without a %s actually affected BOTH wu-ftpd and ProFTPD?
Right now, I'd call them about on par, and there's no reason to move users to a totally different configuration file layout if it doesn't get them any major benefits.
Also, last time I checked (admittedly I haven't checked the latest couple of releases), ProFTPD didn't support virtual hosts with different password files for each of them. Same for e-mail notifications to the admin for uploads by anonymous and a couple of other features.
Lastly, there's kwuftpd (included in kdeadmin as of KDE 2.0) which provides an easy way to configure wu-ftpd. I haven't seen a similar tool for ProFTPD.
Sendmail is still the default MTA
Yes. Some people rely on its features.
Some of the alternatives (especially postfix, IMO) are great, but not sufficient for everyone.
shouldn't [OpenSSH] obsolete rshd/rexecd and to a lesser extent telnetd?
No way.
Interoperability is still important, and a lot of other OSes (even other Linux distributions) still can't access ssh servers.
We aren't enabling rshd and friends by default, but it's important to keep them in - many setups still depend on them.
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
I get to upgrade all my RPM's again! Hopefully it'll all work with kernel 2.4.0-test8, since that's what I've been running lately, but it'll probably break all the extra RPM's I have for the NCSU realm. Oh well, I can probably fix that...
But guys, only do this if you like to live on the bleeding edge; the X.0 Redhat releases are generally pretty rough, with lots of new stuff; I know, because I've been through three of them. If you're just trying out Linux for the first time, stick with 6.2 and wait for the reviews.
Generally Redhat Release X.1 is pretty decent, and X.2 is downright stable. If you're deploying a system based on RedHat, go with 6.2 and all the updates, with Bastille and the Openwall security patch, and watch redhat.com for updates. Otherwise, beware.
Also, what's this 'apt-get' for Redhat I keep hearing about? I've been using rpmfind for a while, and it works great. RedHat has their own stuff for this these days, but generally rpmfind.net is faster for me...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
I've stuck with Redhat for a while because I didn't think it was worth the trouble to upgrade. I started a new job, they were using debian there, and I just had to switch! Debian installation and configuration was quite easy. It's not for everyone, you need to get your hands a little dirty, but it was much easier than Slakware was (the dist previous to RedHat). And apt-get is the *bomb*
Truffle
---
I support spreading santorum
Even windows updates are Free! why would ANYONE want to pay for this? btw i dont mean from like windows 95 to 98 just general updates from http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com, LIKE redhat is gonna do , Im guess you CAN get a binary KERNEL if theres an exploit..
All users of version 7.0 will be offered a free 60-day trial of the network, as will purchasers of Red Hat's retail products. You guys always wanna bitch and moan about stuff, even when it's good stuff. Try it for 60 days, then dump it...
Will Samba be upgraded to run in Windows 2000 networks?
Samba 2.0.7 supports Windows2000 clients just fi ne as long as file sharing is concerned.
On the other hand even the CVS version (HEAD) of samba still does not support windows 2000 client logons, so there you go.
Wasn't there supposed to be a release of the :)
server software or specs so we could run "update agents" or whatever it was called on other servers than redhats? Perhaps we can just subscribe to our friends servers... this would also be useful for people who want to do custom patches for a field of machines.. of course apt-get works for that as well.. but then you have to have debians release cycle
Did I read that right????? They're going to charge for updates? Did Microsoft move to North Carolina? Come on Red Hat, get with it!
Incorrect. I bought winodws 95, and they've made me pay for three bugfix packs now. 98, 98SE, and ME.
I don't like fish. Reverse the fish to e-mail.
They are upset that Slackware is at version 7.1 :)
You should really read Volkerding's reason for bumping the version number from 4 to 7... it is outrageously funny.
Of course, I am a Slackware user so the 'funny' part may not apply to you.
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
7.0 includes the kawasaki USB-to-ethernet (i.e., netgear dongle) driver a friend of mine wrote. Pretty cool!
</joy>
---- ----
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Like someone else has pointed out..
Windows update is free.
Debian gives you that service for free too.
So why pay redhat for that?
hey taco! haven't you tried the Storm Package Manager? it's got all the features of apt, in a nice GUI interface. from what i've heard, it does more then gnome-apt, and it'll be included in Woody some time soon.
you can get it right now, along with other nifty additions like the Storm Adminstration System, from the stormix ftp site.
Or, add the following line to your /etc/apt/sources.list file and do an "apt-get update; apt-get install stormpkg":
deb http://ftp.stormix.com/storm hail main contrib
blatant plug: try out the new Storm Linux distribution (called Hail) that just got released, based on the latest debian potato. I wrote part of the ftp install :)
-Doviende
"The value of a man resides in what he gives,
and not in what he is capable of receiving."
"The value of a man resides in what he gives,
and not in what he is capable of receiving."
--Albert Einstein
They use 3 revision numbers (.0, .1, .2) and then work on a distribution that may break binary compatibility due to a major program update. 5.0 was glibc, 6.0 was kernel 2.2 (I think). In this case, GCC is upgraded to 2.96 which means C++ programs may have issues.
--
Ben Kosse
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
Windows Update suck, and are pathetic, kludgy interfaces
Bullshit, Windows update is a very clean. The only client side install is a small activex control it's a transparent install of of a tiny WMI program that quickly scans your computer for what updates the webpage should bother to tell you about. It couldn't be simpler.
I honestly think that you haven't used windows update, or are just another stupid linux zealot blindly bashing anything with the microsoft name
-Jon
this is my sig.
I have used rh for some time now, and I have never had a problem (or at least one that hasn't prevented me from doing something prodcutive). I will continue to use rh because I trust that it will work correctly everytime I install it, and it has. I highly doubt that all rh rpms will have a charge associated with them, especially the higher security ones. As someone who will never go into a computer related field, and who has a limited knowledge of the linux community, I feel I must comment as an outsider. about 95% of the recent posts are NEGATIVE. I don't know if many people know, but there is something called POSITVE CRITISISM. "We hate this, we hate that..." come on CHILDREN, GET A LIFE. If you don't like something, propose ways of changing it but don't HATE it outright. If you like another distro, fine. DON'T HATE ME BECAUSE I DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY. Isn't the whole idea behind LINUX to be DIFFERENT. I am really disgusted by /. readers
I am just wonder why they are releasing 7.0 so soon instead of waiting until linux kernel 2.4 and XFree86 4.x will stabilize more? On the other hand if the latest kernel 2.4.x and XFree86 4.x are not included, then what is redhat's excuse for such a major version bump? If all they want is release a few updates to 6.2 they could just make it "6.3"
Seriously, only a FOOL installs *any* new linux distro on a net connected machine he cares anything about. I just built a new machine. RH 6.1 with the shitloads of RPMs to fix bugs. I prefer stuff that's had a good shakedown, even if it means not having the latest features.
Ah HA! I was trying to login to my LAN with smbclient on my Linux box, and it was asking me for a password. I tried the administrator password (which logically should've worked), and it wouldn't go in! Good thing I installed Win2k on my former Linux box; now I can start a Q3 server again (The DMZ option on my router was set to the box's IP).
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
There are several points.
With Microsoft you pay for a 'premium update service' whether you want to use one or not.
With RedHat you only pay for it IF you want it.
If you don't you still have access to updates through normal channels.
As proprietary vendor Microsoft's Windows Update is as much a tool for Microsoft to pimp out their latest wares as it is a tool for the user (I for one regret also downloading Media Player 7 when I last went to get a Java VM fix from Windows Update).
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
hmmmmmm. Well anyone who believes in free software can simply use Debian with its apt-get system.
There are 500 million Windows 9x users. Would even a tenth of them pay for the Windows update feature?
Another point of note is that the updates that Microsoft downloads to your PC are updates to Microsoft software only. I could be wrong though.
Get the ISO9660 image here: http://ftpsearch.lycos .com/cgi-bin/search?form=advanced&query=redhat-7%2 A.iso&doit=Search&type=Case+insensitive+ multiple+substrings+search&doexact=on&hits=50&matc hes=&hitsprmatch=&limdom=&limpath=&limsi ze1=500000000&limsize2=&limtime1=&limtime2=&f1=Cou nt&f2=Mode&f3=Size&f4=Date&f5=Host&f6=Pa th&header=none&sort=hostdist&trlen=20
If you run a nice clean theme, probably. If you run an all-singing, all-dancing, ridiculous theme, probably not.
Will Microsoft stop changing their protocol for no other reason than to break Samba?
Will Creative release Windows drivers that don't crash your system every time you attempt to play a sound?
I don't - I'm happily running Debian and intend to stay running Debian!
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
If you had actually been there at least once you would know that it is Krispy Kreme not crispy creme
Seriously, What is LSB?
How the hell did this get moderated down to 0? Lay off the $3 crack, moderators!
In case you didn't know, dear anonymous coward, cowards like you post at 0 automatically.
And that's why we have so many window managers; fvwm, afterstep, enlightenment, kwm, mwm, ctwm, blackbox, et cetera. You can pick your window manager based on your needs and desires (Except, unfortunately, I have yet to find a wm that will make my pictures of Claudia Schiffer come to life) while minimizing your cpu and memory use.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Looks nice, won't compile. Not worth much.
Tried it with egcs and *shudder* MSVC.
-Peter
It's nice that they list all the critical bugs and provide RPMs to fix them, but why can't I get one single RPM that brings me up to date, like when I do a new install from the 6.1 CD? And how about applying the fixes to the old CD and put a new ISO image up with all fixes in place? Say a 6.1.1 or a 6.1.2 CD as needed.
So a "good" thing is a new secure digital distribution format. A way of selling public databases. A "good" thing is basically a new way of way of making money for some people. A thing that is good in an unselfish way, such as a volunteer project, a free display of art, or a public protest is rarely good. Usually it is "weird".
That way we can all subscribe to the unspoken fiction that one day we shall be the lucky ones, we shall be the ones who will see the way and make money, and may god keep us safe until then...
Personaly ive been using autorpm for the last 2 years now to automagicly update my servers ...
a utorpm for more info).
:)
(see http://freshmeat.net/projects/autorpm/?highlight=
From what i gather from the redhat network description, its basicly just a redhat aproved autorpm like program.
Seen in this light, i do agree that ZDNet's bold statement of 'Bold new tech' seems a little bold on its own
-- Chris Chabot
"I dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it!"
Great, another release for the sake of a release!
There seems to be not a lot of reason to move from a .2 (stable) to a .0 added features!, Am I totally missing something or have there been some MAJOR additions?
Suggested name for this release.... RedSoft
This space intentionally blank
I imagine that's what this is for. Most people will keep their system up-to-date on a piece-by-piece basis. I know I do. For those who want to do it all in one whack, you can buy a CD, or burn one yourself, and select the "upgrade" option. For those who don't want to download a whole CD, they can use Red Hat Networks to upgrade just the packages they need to. Sure, they could do it like you ask, but this is a company that *needs* to make money. Most new companies that arn't making a big profit after a few years get shut down by their investors. Red Hat is still in the red, in a big way. So, they've got to make money somehow, and I guess this is it ;)
Dave
'Round the firewall,
Out the modem,
Through the router,
Down the wire,
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Why would you want to install 7.0 anyway. The dot o's are not nearly as stable. Never buy a dot o(IMHO).
KidSock
Well, at least Microsoft makes Windows Update free :)
Yup, I think my system is at a point now where I wouldn't dare trying to upgrade from the CD automatically, manually maybe.
If you strip your system down to just what you actually use then keeping up to date isn't that difficult. (in fact I may even get round to doing that someday :)
~ppppppppö
[Steve Martin voice] Excuse me, I'm sorry, I'm so PISSED!
Go ahead. Mark this as flamebait. Mark me down, bring up the same complaints already voiced in other threads as if they're unique...but answer me this;
Why are people ripping RedHat a new one?
Is this just an attempt at 'bash the leader' again? Sure looks like it, and I'm sick of it.
Is any of this based on facts of a real problem, or just unhappyness over someone charging for something nobody's forcing you to buy?
I'll give folks who mentioned Debian/apt-get/windows_update/... a point. Yes, those are handy. You can do similar things with RPM -- no not _identical_, _similar_. Not really interesting, though.
If you know how to run a Linux system, you probably don't need any special services. I sure don't want to update anything without seeing if there's a reason and what those changes are first. If you want to use the service, and it saves you some anguish/time/effort then it does not seem that prohibitive.
It's like people complaining about the cost of VMware or other handy tools. If you don't want to play, don't pay. Why gripe about it?
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
I think a lot of the people posting to this article missed the point of the RedHat Network.
Big businesses like subscription models, for a number of reasons. Pay-as-you-go, and pay-as-much-as-you-use-it allow them to tailor the pricing to their needs. And the subscription-style updates frees them from having to worry so much about the OS changing. Having updates and new releases automatically shipped to you vastly simplifies the whole process. If you read the article, you'd note that the subscription will delivered on CD as well as electronic distribution.
Its true that the updates were available from their site, and with up2date. But this is going beyond simple OS updates. Read the article and you'll see how.
Up2date, despite being a piece of crap, has provided free update functionality too.
RedHat is taking the opportunity to exploit it's newfound customer base. Even ZDNet realizes this, so it must be pretty obvious.
What's so hard about dealing with the mirrors? Downloading RH is trivial(provided you have a worthy connection). This is a non-issue.
KidSock
"So what happens to those of us who like to sometimes reinstall fresh from the media? We reinstall, and then have to wait for all the updates to be downloaded all over again. Unless we can save the update .rpm's and write
them onto a copy of our RedHat 7.0 disk in place of the 7.0 files. Now that
would be neat."
I do this all the time with Red Hat installs. There is a 'Red Hat CD making HOWTO' at www.linuxdoc.org which shows you how to merge the latest RPM updates into the original copy of a release and subsequently burn a CD. It is very easy to do this too because that HOWTO has some perl scripts to automate much of the process of merging.
Let's see, Linux 2.4 is almost out, GNOME 1.4 is due in October, but they're releasing a major new version of RedHat? Isn't it premature? Oh, I forgot, if you buy it now, you can get auto-updated when the new kernel is ready.
.rpm's and write them onto a copy of our RedHat 7.0 disk in place of the 7.0 files. Now that would be neat.
So what happens to those of us who like to sometimes reinstall fresh from the media? We reinstall, and then have to wait for all the updates to be downloaded all over again. Unless we can save the update
- Quantum Seep
Please don't tell this new RedHat will give me more bugs.
-AZ-
I think what all you geeks are missing is that RH is doing this for the coprate market and that the coprate market likes paying for things /. story........)
............arrh so thats why it's version 7.0 not 6.3, the version number wars
;oþ
They associate price with quality, something we all tend to do when faced with buying things that we dont have a detailed knowledge of.
Hence I imagine that this will be relatively successful.
(I notice SuSE 7.0 didn't get a
I tried, for the first time, to install RedHat alongside Windows this past weekend. I was appalled to find that the RedHat 6.1 installer wasn't able to do a non-destructive repartition, nor did it play well with Windows after I did so by hand. I tried and tried to get LILO (I have no experience with it, but I read every related HOWTO and FAQ) to recognize Windows, even popping my head into #linpeople for help, but I got nowhere. I eventually uninstalled Linux and apologized to the victim, my girlfriend, who is now somewhat less than impressed with Linux.
Of course, it's my fault that I couldn't get things running right, but this seems like a no-brainer for RedHat. They need to get the rights to (or make) a disk optimizing utility and a non-destructive repartitioning utility. So here's my question: does 7.0 incorporate this? For folks like my girlfriend that just want to try Linux, not go whole-hog, the 6.1 setup is ludicrous. As a 5-year Linux user, I should have known how to do this. As a brand-new user, there's no possible way that she would be able to install RedHat. How can we hope to get more widespread use of Linux without comfortable, flexible, reasonable installers?
-Waldo
I have a sblive card and its never crashed or had any problems. You must be using beta drivers or something.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Unfortunately, the OSS movement has a lot of people who are a little too deep in the socialist utopia ideal. Who cares that RedHat gives away their software for anyone to download. They are evil becuase they *gasp* want to make money.
The updates will still be available on updates.redhat.com just like they always have. RedHat is targeting the subscription services at corporations. They aren't holding back any software, just tailoring their premium services.
World Beach List, my latest project.
I've used RedHat and Debian side by side since RedHat 4.x and Debian 1.1, and I would have to say that I am a bit disappointed with the direction RedHat has been heading.
:P ) with the community, but corporate execs will eat it up. Hey, cool! Now we can pay for a TechNet subscription and a RedHat subscription! Right, okay. They feel secure when they pay for stuff. That's fine with me, it's not my money.
For me at least, each release of Debian is an exciting leap forward. This is partially due to the time span between releases, and partially due to the strong and very open community effort that Debian is. Each release has done a solid job improving what Debian is, and setting the path for what the next release will do.
In contrast, RedHat releases rarely incite excitement. Partially because the distro as a whole has changed relatively little (This can and will be argued to be a good thing), and partially because it is developed by a company, completely in-house, and as such doesn't 'feel' like the community effort that Debian is (Again, this will be argued to be a strength, primarilly by the suits)
RedHat, since somewhere between 5.1 and 6.0, set a clear goal of being the distro for the average users. It has always been a good desktop distro. Indeed, I wouldn't have called Debian a really good desktop distro option until potato, maybe (-maybe-) slink. But certainly not before then. To this day I use RedHat 6.1 on my primary workstation and my laptop. Debian runs my servers, and one other workstation.
So where are we now? I didn't give the release of RedHat 6.2 any attention. I simply didn't see anything there that warrented upgrading, so I stuck with 6.1, and I will continue to stick with it. When the time comes to upgrade my RedHat desktops, maybe in a year or so, I'll move them to Debian.
I have a feeling the fee-based subscription service will prove extremely unpopular (Gee, that's a really hard call
I'm sure the distro will continue to be a perfectly good desktop distro, so it's hardly time for everybody to jump ship from RedHat. It's not suddenly becoming unusuable, nor is it suddenly becoming a sugar coated distro like Corel. But to me, it has taken a turn for the worse over the years.
Gorkman
everything available through this service, will be available for FREE through their FTP site...
this is just a "click here and wait for redhat to update everything for you w/o any hassle" service... HelixCode GNOME is doing the same service, and i believe they are going to be charging for it as well...
im all for it actually... think about it, how else are you going to make money on linux other then tech support? all these linux companies need to do now, is set up a nationwide network of linux consultants to help them get linux into the average businesses...
Cybie! aka Ralph Bonnell
RedHat's already been providing software update functionality since 6.1 (Maybe 6.0, I don't remember), for free. The app strikingly resembles Windows Update (Which is to say both RH's updater and Windows Update suck, and are pathetic, kludgy interfaces)
What is interesting here are the negative comments about Red Hat. Is it's just because your using Debian or is everyone generally dissapointed with the progress of Linux distributions? Wierd.
KidSock
Try visiting windowsupdate.microsoft.com with Lynx, its just plain awesome.
Lars -
If they include RPM4, that alone is beyond the scope of a simple upgrade release like 6.2 was. As for the kernel and X, well, distros are usually lousy about waiting for those two to do releases. Debian has notoriously bad luck timing its releases with kernel releases, for example :)
Aside from that, their self-balyhooed fee-based software updating service connotates new features (Editorial comments being withheld) that add to the reasoning for this to be more than a simple upgrade release. 7.0 was, for all intents and purposes, the right number for this release.
Check out all the o's in windows 2000 !
Lars -
Hey now... You have to admit the MSN comercial with the guy that has the hiccups isn't funny. I laugh every time. :)
...
"Is it really a good idea to scare him? Look at him, he's 75 years old"
"AAAAAAAAHHGGG!!!!!"
-Brandon
RedHat didn't have many upgrades in the 7.0beta. I can't see why they are releasing another version. I am happy with my 6.2 with the updates I do every once in a while... screw 7.0!!
From the article, there doesn't seem to be many significant improvements that aren't being made by a million-and-one other distrobutions. The "auto-update" concept is not new. It's been in Mandrake and Debian for a while now-plus it's free. Also, Mandrake 7.2 will ship with kernel 2.4 and kde2/GNOME1.2. Plus, it will have the usual large number of other updates/improvements. Can RedHat say this?
-----------------------------------------
Perversely greped and groped by PowerPenguin
Which is a better response, a) or b)?
Or how about this one?It looks to me like Mr. Suit would be more likely to take your proposal seriously if you answered a) to both of his questions. They are looking for the "reliable" solution, even if they have to pay for it.
I don't even use Redhat, I just think they have a pretty good idea
Cheers
<high-level position here>
<name of stupid small company here>
Does anyone know if this will install to an ATA/100 drive? Because none of the current Linux distros will install to ATA/100, not even slackware with the ata66.i bootdisk.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
My bad, thanks though.
<high-level position here>
<name of stupid small company here>
O'Reilly has made Using Samba free to read in html format, and you can download the pdf and print the fucker out.
Warning: you may have to learn something in the process, if you are not comfortable with this, please run out and buy Windows 2000.
Lars -
Why in the world is this a dot o release? I would expect dot o if it was kernel 2.4 and XFree 4 etc. But dot o is not warranted. I think there suits must be up to something. They are projecting profitability in 2002. Lost a penny this quarter. But I think they should polish 6.x. That would be wiser. I would think people would rather buy 6.3 than 7.0 because the dot o's are usually unstable.
KidSock
If you go read the book entitled Using Samba which is distributed with the latest Samba tarballs, you find out on nearly every other page on what to do with Encrypted Passwords, and how to add users so that encrypted passwords work. Using plain passwords is ok on a private secure LAN, but its just so easy to add a user to the encrypted password database.
Can you point out in the Samba documentation where they recommend turning on plain text passwords?
Lars -