Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CentOs 4.0 Released

Posted by timothy on from the oh-you-mean-xandros dept.

fluor2 writes "The CentOS team is pleased to announce availability of CentOS 4.0. Major new features include the Linux 2.6 Kernel, SELinux, udev replacing the /dev system, Xorg, MySQL4, CyrusIMAPD, Gnome 2.8 and KDE 3.3. These improvements along with many more are detailed in the release notes available online. We read recently about Red Hat & Centos On Name Usage, and the solution is now to link to a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor (PNAELV).
Go ahead and download CentOs from one of their mirrors."

16 of 48 comments (clear)

  1. some explanation by biglig2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd never heard of Centos, so I looked it up. It's an interesting idea.

    They take the source code for RHEL, build it, and put it on an ISO.

    Sounds interesting, I imagine if I were to try and sell my bosses on a Linux system for work they'd want something like RHEL, and this is a way to get hold of it and try it without buying a license. you could get a full prototype going and not need to spend any money until you wanted a real copy with a support contract.

    --
    ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    1. Re:some explanation by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2, Funny
      I'd never heard of Centos
      That's "GNU/Centos", buster, and don't you forget it!
      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  2. How similar is it? by mogrify · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can someone speak to the differences between Red Hat and CentOS, if any? Are there any caveats for running this in production, or as a testing box for a production RHEL server? Any missing features? Are the RPMs 100% compatible, no worries? How about customized RPMs? Is it really just as simple as RHEL4 with no support and RHN?

    --
    perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
    1. Re:How similar is it? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 3, Informative

      from the centOS site
      "CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor. CentOS conforms fully with the upstream vendors redistribution policy and aims to be 100% binary compatible. (CentOS mainly changes packages to remove upstream vendor branding and artwork.) CentOS is free, however, we ask for a small contribution. CentOS is a project of the cAos Foundation."

      So it apears the only changes made are to remove brandings. So i would imagine it would run in a near identical fashion to RHEL ,
      http://www.centos.org.nyud.net:8090/
      all the info is on the main page(coral cach just incase) , i cant tell you definantly if they achive this goal , but I see very little reason as to why they shouldnt , unless redhat is not
      opening all its sources , which is unlikly.

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    2. Re:How similar is it? by Yonder+Way · · Score: 4, Interesting

      CentOS is Red Hat Enterprise Linux without the bullying tactics.

      I have run CentOS for about a year now on several hundred machines and it works great. The major caveat if you're used to Red Hat is you need to work out a different patch management system since RHN/up2date isn't there. But yum is built in, and works quite well.

      I was the sole Linux guy at my last job and had no problem deploying and maintaining hundreds of CentOS boxes between Kickstart and yum.

      And there is support. The free support is community based. But you can buy a real honest to goodness support contract with SLA's and everything.

  3. More acronyms by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 2, Funny

    PNALEV can't be pronounced, and it doesn't have an anatomical alternate meaning, so it's no good.

    What we need is a better acronym. So get your Super High Intensity Thinking (SHIT) ready. We need Creative Reasoning Applied to the Problem (CRAP).

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    1. Re:More acronyms by killawatt5k · · Score: 2, Funny

      What about ProNALEV, or Pr0NALEV? Mabee I just like pr0n to much?

  4. Release Notes. Correct Link. by eigerface · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here.

  5. Re:well.... by biglig2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm afraid you do me an injustice; I'm not quite vain enough to believe that just because I've never heard of something that means it must be so new that no-one else has either. ;-)

    I think I will try it, actually, it sounds very interesting.

    --
    ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
  6. Torrents by Kalak · · Score: 3, Informative

    for DVD
    for binary disks 1-4

    --
    I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by .hack)
  7. Note for x86_64 users by Beatbyte · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is NO 4.0 final release ISO files as of yet. The latest available are the 4.0 RC1 ISO's.

    You'll have to wait a bit for the new ISO's.

    --
    Get paid to code OSS
  8. Other distros based on RHEL 4 by waynegoode · · Score: 2, Informative
    There are other distros based on RHEL 4. There are more at DistroWatch. See their list of Red Hat based distos.
  9. Some clarifications by fief · · Score: 3, Informative

    CentOS is one of several projects that took the source rpms from Redhat and recompiled them into a working set of isos (minus Redhat copyrighted material). Whitebox Linux, Tao Linux, and Scientific Linux are some others.

    They were basically all started independantly of each other.

    Whitebox (being the only one I have really used extensively) is run out of Beauregard Parish Public Library by a a JMorris. He rules with a tyranical fist and has no desire to offer anything other than the bare minimum of changes needed to make the rebuild possible. Now I like this hard-line leadership, but it has caused some friction as to the timelyness of updates.

    I did recently convert a machine that was Whitebox Linux to Tao Linux to verify that it could be done. I followed this basic procedure. With this basic procedure, picking one of the projects over another isn't that much of a life or death decision. It is relatively easy to move between this projects.

    As far as I can tell (not having seen an actual RHEL box) both Whitebox and Tao are very accurate representations of RHEL. I have yet to see an instance where a package desigend for RHEL didn't work with Whitebox and Tao. I have installed Oracle, vmware, various rpm's that were packaged for RHEL without much troubles.

    1. Re:Some clarifications by fluor2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Allthough Whitebox is a similar project, I would like to warn people of using other projects than CentOs. Other distro's are maintained by a very small number of developers, whilst the CentOS team consist of MANY. We ran WhiteBox for a while, and when the main person behind Whitebox was at vacation, there was NO UPDATE what so ever. Read my lips.

  10. Re:well.... by Sosarian · · Score: 2, Informative

    The projects are unrelated.

    If you'd like to migrate from WBEL:
    Migration from WBEL to Centos

    Also check out Whiteboxlinux.net you'll see that the site maintainer was growing frustrated with lack of updates to Whitebox, and switched over to Centos.

    The projects were started about the same time.

    There are also other competing projects Taolinux, Rocks, XOS, etc...

  11. Re:MySQL 4.1 with PHP 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Too bad you can't use google to answer your question *before* you post FUD.

    http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/old-client.htm l