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.
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-
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.
Does RedHat 7 include SSH by default, now that the RSA patent expired?
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".
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.)
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
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?)
[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.
RedHat stated a while back that 7.0 would ship with a 2.2 kernel but that everything would be ready to go for the 2.4 kernel when it became availalble. Expect to see the kernel change as just another update package in a couple of months.
Related to this, KDE 2 is supposed to go final within the next month. That's another major applicaiton set that it would have made sense to wait for. I expect to see this updated after release as well.
Odds are, people can come up with a dozen other major packages that are "close" to having a new stable version ready. If RedHat waited for all of them, they would never get a release out.
World Beach List, my latest project.
Its a 3/4 page ZDNet article, for christ's sake! Have you forgotten that Redhat, just like every other Linux distribution, is based on GPL software? Thats free to upgrade. Why anyone would rely on a distribution to determine what software you get is beyond me. Download what you need, when you need it. Sure, have a list of new packages to review, but don't trust just one source with your computer's (read: network's) well being. One bad package, and everything goes kaputz.
Also, you mention that there is no promise of quality. Of course, Redhat can't guarentee the quality of GPL'd software. No one can! Do you think Debian guarentees all of its packages are bug free? Ha! Of course, since they release a new distro every other year, we should hope there would be less bugs. Just wish harder I guess.
But getting back to Redhat, they probably have an uptime guarentee that says their update server will be up 99.9% of the time or something like that, and that all packages will be updated in a timely fashion. That's better than nothing.
----
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>