Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Linux Project Merges With Fedora
An anonymous reader writes "Red Hat has announced a merger of its Red Hat Linux Project with Fedora Linux, a group that has specialized in providing high-quality RPM packages for Red Hat. According to Red Hat, 'The Fedora Project is a Red-Hat-sponsored and community-supported open source project. It is also a proving ground for new technology that may eventually make its way into Red Hat products.' From the FAQ: 'Rather than being run through product management as something that has to appear on retail shelves on a certain date, Fedora Core will be released based on schedules, set by a steering committee, that will be open and accessible to the community, as well as influenced by the community.'"
Still wouldn't mind seeing a history of Fedora per se though. Seems like it's a more open, community-oriented Rawhide. Is that accurate?
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
From looking at the package list, they are not listed.
The new up2date already available in rawhide and to be included in the next beta already includes APT and Yum repository support. The yum tool (very apt-get like) will also be included with the base distribution in addition to up2date.
AFAIK Red Hat will not sell support for the Fedora distribution. If you want support go with the Enterprise products, of which I'm sure we'll see more of in the future.
The Red Hat/Fedora merger sounds OK. One thing, though: In the past, it has been very difficult to verify the PGP signatures in Fedora's packages: The packager's public keys were hard - sometimes impossible - to find. I have looked through the fedora.redhat.com web site, hoping to find out how they plan to manage PGP-keys and signatures in the new Fedora distribution, but I couldn't find any information. Does anyone know?
Because the red hat in the Red Hat logo is a fedora.
Apologies for the blatent plug, but you might be interested in up3date, which is free in the GPL, money and survey senses, and lets you autoupdate as a cron job from Redhat FTP mirrors or set up your own local HTTP mirrors for supporting multiple machines.
It is another community-oriented project that makes high-quality RPMs for people that have Red Hat Linux, but think Red Hat have messed up bad with KDE. Also, they allowed me to upgrade from KDE 3 to 3.1 using Red Hat 8, without breaking my system. Check these guys out at kde-redhat.sourceforge.net.
Copying myself from OSNews . . .
From http://fedora.redhat.com/about/name.html:
I wish Red Hat weren't so non-committal here, but does this mean that instead of CheapBytes selling Pink Tie, LinuxCD selling Blue Jacket, and OSDisc selling Red Tux, every third-party CD Vendor will just call it Fedora?
I tried Red Hat Linux Severn yesterday, I had some terrible problems with it. I had bought a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4 Box to replace my old 68K based imac with MacOS 6.8 running photoshop 3.1
God I hate feeding trolls.. but for those who didn't catch this:
- There was no 6.8 (there was a 6.0.8, but it was only released as an after-thought for increased compatability with the already-out 7.0)
- There were no 68k iMacs.
Go mooch off some other pond, foo.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
http://kde-redhat.sf.net
Here are some good places for newbies to start with Linux...
Hope this helps!
"A revolution without dancing is... a revolution not worth having"
MS has a very consistant standard for UI.
Bullshit. Microsoft USED to have a very consistant UI. Gradually, they are corrupting individual packages to make them INCONSISTANT.
Example: Word vs. Excel.
Open 2 word documents. You get 2 items on the task bar. And each window is totally seperate. Use the upper-right close button to close one window, then then other.
Now, open 2 EXCEL documents.. Two windows... Two icons on the task bar. Click the upper-right close button on one of the windows... BOTH WINDOWS CLOSE>
Excel has always had a dependent window model, each spreadsheet was a sub window of the master window (a la program manager in Windows 3.1), but, users complained because each sheet didn't show up in the task bar.. So they completely trashed the dependent window model for Excel, and now window-management between Word and Excel have different behaviors.
There are other consistancies in double-clicking in windows explorer, and etc..
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
Responsiveness? OSX's GUI is *way* less responsive than X, because everything is doublebuffered through the video card. That makes it *very* smooth, but it's not responsive at all. X isn't terribly responsive either, but it's better than OSX's.
Windows is probably the most responsive.
According to the Fedora desktop project page, the Desktop includes (among other things) the "email/calendaring" application. (Evolution, one presumes.)
<SOAPBOX>Email and a calendar are not the same application. Doesn't anyone see this but me??
Let's have a lean, mean app whose function is to be a calendar, and another, equally tight app for email. They should exchange data easily. That's the unix way, and it's a good one. There's no reason for this to conflict with the goals of ease of use. (Trying to combine two disparate applications makes it harder to use IMHO.)
</SOAPBOX>--
bachiatari na torisetsu o yome!
The GPL has very specific requirements about software that uses patented technology. Basically, regardless of whether or not fraunhoffer requires licensing fees means little. The only person that has a right to distribute GPL'd mp3 based software is Fraunhoffer. If Fraunhoffer did that, anyone could use MP3 GPL software for Commercial or Non-Commercial purposes.
Yep, but you're wrong in one way. Fauhoffer only intended to make this packages this way. Software players are still allowed to be GPLed after MP3 specs. Changes for free software players were only intended. SO HAT MAKES GPLed MP3 player still a valid piece
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
The goal is to provide as many routes for distribution as we can - both of ISO files and updates for the current version - which in generally will be following the mainstream, so if sendmail 8.foo has a bug and they put out 8.foo+1, expect the path to be an update to foo+1. We can do this with Fedora while with RHEL you have to do careful backports of specific fixes.
With regard to custom stuff the best model may well be to set up your own local YUM repository o the extra's you maintain - either for yourself or for the world to use. Turning a collection of RPM files into a yum repository is nice and easy.
You need an update tool like apt. Upgrade the redhat-release package by hand and the tiny number of bits you need to get apt-rpm for the new version installed (its about 10-12 packages). Then just tell apt/yum/.. to update your box and wait.
You don't get the automatic migration and addition of extra goodies that the installer does but in general it works fine and for anyone with a little knowledge adding a few packages on top by hand is not hard.
Funnily enough the new rawhide up2date has the option "--upgrade-to-release=[version]"
I was shocked to see them dropping mature popular window managers (fvwm et al), and classics like xtetris and xevil, as well as UNIX staples like fortune.
In all cases, it is because these programs conflict with the goal of selling the Redhat distro as a business desktop system, with minimum variations between installations and nothing "non-professional"
Actually, xtetris and fortune were both dropped for licensing reasons. Tetris is copyrighted, and Red Hat doesn't have the rights to distribute it. Fortune doesn't have copyrights to a large portion of the quotes in the standard databases. These items, along with mp3 software support were dropped as Red Hat (and everyone else) becomes more aware of the property issues that have from time to time been ignored.
> I heard someone say that with this Red Hat is trying to be more like Debian. What does this mean? What advantage(s) of Debian is Red Hat hoping to replicate by doing this?
The Debian distribution has three branches labelled "stable", "testing" and "unstable". Stable has well-tested, solid code - and the code won't be updated, except for security violations, for the life of that stable release. This makes it *very* good for servers, but not so good for home users and perhaps office workstations. Red Hat 7.3 can be compared to the Debian stable release. The lack of fixes being backported is somewhat annoying at times - such as the failure of the 7.3 BIND 9 to properly use rndc when stopping the service, for example. This is fixed in the BIND9 for RH9, but won't be backported. When Samba 3 is released, odds are great there won't be an official RH7.3 package for it - an annoyance for those with 7.3 servers in a Microsoft Active Directory environment.
For more current software, at a greater risk of some instabilities in that software, Debian offers the unstable and testing branches. Unstable is where the latest and greatest versions of packages are placed. New bug fixes and features go here. You risk some breakage, though, as you are the front-line tester of this software. Most of the time this isn't a problem, but occaisionally... Red Hat's rawhide and Mandrakes cooker are the unstable equivalents.
After a package has been in unstable for two weeks without having any critical bugs filed against it, the package is copied to the testing branch. Testing is next-to-leading-edge. It contains current software, but it's had exposure to a larger userbase prior to being introduced into the branch. Fedora will (hopefully) be like the Debian testing branch, and will allow current but tested versions of Red Hat software to be available on a regular basis for those wishing to keep their desktop systems more up to date than with a deliberately stable (unchanging) release.
Ark Linux www.arklinux.com is an apt-get based red hat derivative linux that is very desktop oriented. its in its late alpha stages right now but is very stable. If you run debian testing its probably more than stable enough for your needs.. here is a link to a review of arklinux at extremetech ... It is very KDE-centric and uses the keramik/geramik theme sets to make kde and gnome look similar. I've been using it for months and its by far the best linux distribution ive ever used (and ive used them all)