Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat Exec Takes Over Open Source Initiative

Posted by Zonk on from the new-man-under-the-hat dept.

njcoder writes "CNet reports that Michael Tiemann, vice president of open-source affairs at Linux seller Red Hat and an OSI board member, has taken over from Russell Nelson as president pro tem. 'We thought that Michael would be a better president' Nelson said of the change, declining to share further details. Nelson will remain a board member and active in the group, he said."

144 comments

  1. I suppose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    this is good news. Red Hat has been instrumental in much of the open source movement but they are very corporate these days. I will be attending a RHEL 4 pitch/SE Linux pitch soon, atypical for Linux.

    1. Re:I suppose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who cares? "Large Corporation tries to make money off the backs of misguided and unpaid developers shocker" - film at 11.


      Let's face it, the Linux trend is over. All the cool kids are using MacOS X and loving the way it "just works", and yet they get the 'leetness' of using a unix derivative.

    2. Re:I suppose by ssbljk · · Score: 1

      I don't think that it has anything with redhat - point is on Michael Tiemann. And I don't what could be changed much, both were board members already.

      --
      /ss
  2. Credentials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does Michael Tiemann have the right trollish credentials? I'm not sure I've ever seen him post to Slashdot at all, let alone start a flamewar.

    1. Re:Credentials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Michael Tiemann have the right trollish credentials? I'm not sure I've ever seen him post to Slashdot at all, let alone start a flamewar.

      I hear he's a founding member of the GNAA but so far they've refused to confirm it.

    2. Re:Credentials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tieman was one of the Adequacy founders. Or was that Shoeboy?

    3. Re:Credentials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adequacy was not full of 'trolls' as many people seem to think. It just offered a platform for some very controversial opinions. Too bad they shut it down. I still wonder what happened there. Did AMD sue them?

    4. Re:Credentials? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      He does have a Slashdot account. He only posted once but he did get in a quick BSD-troll at the end.

  3. w00t by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 2, Funny

    There is a god. This guy was a bad slashdot troll, I'm telling you...

    --
    The Yasashii Syndicate ||
    1. Re:w00t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, I'M a bad troll!

      WARNING! NSFW!

  4. Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "Take over"? I like the sound of that.

    After all, Red Hat is the de facto standard of all open source. Intel's compilers, Oracle and everything corporate is designed for it. Good luck installing not to mention running anything like that on other distributions.

    1. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by LnxAddct · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure if that was a compliment or an insult to Red Hat, but regardless, Michael is a good guy with a good head on his shoulders. If you've ever seen his writings or hear him talk you'd know what I mean. Afterall, he did write the first GNU C++ compiler. He recently also did a little video thing for Red Hat magazine showing the benefits of open source. He truly is an innovative and important guy in the community. Congratulations to him. For those who don't know, Red Hat has many individuals like this that are just as influential and important in the OSS world (i.e. Alan Cox), don't let one bad marketing decision make you hate Red Hat. Without them, who knows where we'd be, even OSS programmers have to eat.

      Regards,
      Steve

      P.S. For a little blurb on Michael, read this.

    2. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Ulric · · Score: 1

      I've been running Oracle on Slackware since 8.0.5. No problems. Software that comes packaged in RPMs and depends on Red Hat RPMs can be very annoying, for example HP Insight Manager. Spent several frustrating hours trying to install it on Debian the other day.

    3. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Compenguin · · Score: 1

      >After all, Red Hat is the de facto standard of all open source. Intel's compilers, Oracle and everything corporate is designed for it. Good luck installing not to mention running anything like that on other distributions.

      If it were the defacto standard of all open source like you assert then we'd have problems running all sorts of OSS on anything other than red hat but that is not the case. I may have problems running soem closed source db, or a closed source compiler but that makes redhat teh defacto standerd of linux not of OSS. I'll continue to be happy running an OSS datbase and an OSS compiler on my generic OSS system.

    4. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      even OSS programmers have to eat.


      That's what cafepress is for.

    5. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by RWerp · · Score: 1

      All binary packages are annoying in the same way (library requirements), regardless of the package format. What's in RPM that people see flaws general to binary packages and attribute it specifically to RPM?

      --
      "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
    6. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Ulric · · Score: 1
      Nope. Binary packages that don't require RPM are happy as long as the libraries or other required components are there. RPM doesn't handle the case where required software components have been installed from .deb or .tgz packages, or from source. Or, for that matter, from an rpm from another vendor or even the same vendor but a newer version.

      RPM has the added problem that it doesn't handle overlapping packages, i.e. files that exist in more than one package. That is a problem RPM shares with other package managers (except the one in Slackware).

    7. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > RPM has the added problem that it doesn't handle overlapping packages, i.e. files that exist in more than one package.

      No. files should have the same md5sum. You can use "--replacefiles" if needed.

    8. Re:Red Hat the new Microsoft of OSS? by RWerp · · Score: 1

      Did you ever hear about --nodeps and --force options?

      --
      "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
  5. "Open Source" BogoTrademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Russ made some statements on slashdot where he admitted that "Open Source" was not a trademark but for whatever reason was just as good as one and could be defended in court by OSI.

    Then there was discussion that the "definition" fo Open Source would be reduced to exclude certain Free Software licences.

    For someone in charge of a branding effort all of this seemed a little rash. Perhaps internal dissent is what was going on behind the scenes.

    1. Re:"Open Source" BogoTrademark by Ralph+Yarro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then there was discussion that the "definition" fo Open Source would be reduced to exclude certain Free Software licences.

      To be fair to Russ, that seemed to be part of a general corporatization agenda. The pressure to redefine open source was coming from HP through OSDL. A Red Hat guy running OSI is probably just another step along that road. Not saying that's good or bad, but it's what's happening.

      --

      The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
    2. Re:"Open Source" BogoTrademark by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A Red Hat guy running OSI

      I don't look at it that way at all. It's more like "The creator of g++ is heading OSI".
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    3. Re:"Open Source" BogoTrademark by Ralph+Yarro · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Thanks for sticking around here despite the flaming you get, it is appreciated in some of our saner moments :)

      --

      The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
    4. Re:"Open Source" BogoTrademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      One thing that is really important is that he not let his Red Hat position influence his role at OSI. Red Hat competes with Sun in some markets, for example, and Red Hat's CEO has spread FUD about OpenSolaris in interviews, because it is in his interest to do so. As a leader of OSI, Tiemann would have to go beyond the FUD and take the stance that the CDDL is OSI certified, and, therefore, OpenSolaris will be truly open source.
      Anything less would ruin the credibility of the OSI.

  6. Better fedora? by caryw · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Redhat alienated much of their loyal userbase with the introduction of Fedora Core. This is a step in the right direction for Redhat to get back to their roots and stop concentrating so hard on their commercial offerings that they leave their grassroots projects underdevloped and insufficient. Short bio. Interview from a few years ago
    - Cary
    --Fairfax Underground: Where Fairfax County comes out to play

    1. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unrelated Point + Random Googled Link != Insightful

    2. Re:Better fedora? by ajs · · Score: 0, Troll

      Red Hat GAINED a much larger loyal user base in releasing Fedora than they EVER had with Red Hat Linux. Let's not try to paint events to match your hurt feelings (presuming that that's why you're upset, I could be wrong).

    3. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't trust people looking like this.

    4. Re:Better fedora? by bogie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      " stop concentrating so hard on their commercial offerings "

      Their commercial offerings are what allow them to finance Fedora, Gnome, people like Alan Cox, and many other OSS initiatives. Plus they give away the source to that commercial offering.

      "they leave their grassroots projects underdevloped and insufficient"

      Says you. Fedora from the start has been in many users and reviewers opinions one of the better desktop linux distros available.

      People need to get over the "Red Hat owes the community something" bullshit. Yes they moved away from the $79 one-size-fits-all model that everyone loved and many miss but they still contine to be a positive force in OSS.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    5. Re:Better fedora? by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1
      Then why does anyone who knows more than jack shit about Linux use a different distro?

      There's plenty of people who didn't use RedHat well before the split in RedHat's offerings and the introduction of the Fedora distro.
    6. Re:Better fedora? by ndtechnologies · · Score: 0

      The sad thing is I really liked Red Hat 8,9 and FC 1,2. I really dislike FC3. Nothing worked properly. I had so many problems with it that I switched to Mandrake 10.1. I really tried to be a loyal Red Hat user, but IMO Fedora Core has become worse with each release, but again that is only my opinion. I'm hoping that FC 4 will be better than 3...maybe I'll switch back if it is.

      --
      I have nothing clever to put here...
    7. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Fedora Core 2 and Gentoo. I figured Linspire and the like was the "don't know jack shit" distros.

    8. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello, there. I've been using Linux for ten years. In other words, I was using Linux when you were still playing with your Super Nintendo. I, most assurably, know far more about Linux than you can dream to know. I also use Fedora Core three.

      As you were saying?

    9. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello, there. I've been using Linux for ten years. In other words, I was using Linux when you were still playing with your Super Nintendo. I, most assurably, know far more about Linux than you can dream to know. I also use Fedora Core three.

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      Stupid arrogant bastard.

    10. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      him pointing out you being a fucking moron stings don't it

    11. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original troll is probably not a virgin though.

    12. Re:Better fedora? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they moved away from the $79 one-size-fits-all model that everyone loved and many miss...

      And things will get worse, not better. Why? Because Redhat is now beholden to shareholders, who expect ever increasing returns on their investments. Instead of occupying long-term viable niche in the free software ecology, Redhat must now grow like a cancer. Tell me how this is possible, while simultaneously staying true to the free software idealism on which they were founded.

      People like Alan Cox and Michael Tiemann are Redhat's saving grace. But Redhat's revenues far exceed what is required to support these true idealists; and Redhat's allegiance to Wall Street is a poison that will doom them. Most of Redhat's original idealists are already gone, and I predict it's only a matter of time before the remaining holdouts find a better home also.

    13. Re:Better fedora? by ajs · · Score: 1

      Just following up because the mod of "troll" seemed kind of shocking to me. I want to make it clear here that I firmly believe in what I said. Fedora has a much larger audience than RHL ever did, and many of its users are very loyal. Red Hat may have pissed some people off by EOLing RHL, but that is no reason to ignore the fact that they also PLEASED a lot of people by releasing Fedora.

  7. BAD troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy was a bad slashdot troll, I'm telling you...

    He's a trolling pro. He gets more bites from a "BSD is dying" or "Stallman drinks the kook aid LOL!" post than you ever will.

  8. Bullshit Open Source Zealots! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    > This is a step in the right direction for Redhat
    > to get back to their roots and stop concentrating
    > so hard on their commercial offerings.

    How does a company with many employees work if you stop concentrating on the commercial offerings ?

  9. The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Kip+Winger · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Many non-profit projects out in the world begin as independant projects, but as they grow, are later staffed and controlled by a board and a board chairman all comprised of the powerful ones who bring in profits, the business owners and such, who are the ones capable of further expanding and funding the operation.

    For most of the 1990s, OSS was by programmers for programmers (and to an extent their non-programmer friends), but gradually those in the OSS field have been coopted by the business practices of capitalism, removing the pure element of communalism from the way the software is developed.

    This only portends to what will happen soon: the sponsors of Open Source now include the large dictatorial corporations of the past, including Sun, Novell, and even big blue IBM, and those corporations will soon partition and control as many of the communal efforts as they can.

    --
    - - - - - Fear not the reaper, but my shiny white teeth.
    1. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by dragmorp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Dictatorial Corporations of the Past"

      That is very ominous sounding of you. A corporation is a collection of people. A corporation requires people to buy their products and services. A community requires people to volunteer and contribute. Everyone in the chain must produce value to continue.

      A dictatorship requires guns.

      Do you see the difference?

      Has the entire world gone mad?

    2. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Haven't you realized it yet?

      Corporatism == fascism == dictatorship. It doesn't matter if it's corporate open source or corporate proprietary code. It's the same ultimate evil.

    3. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A dictatorship requires guns

      One could argue that an effective dictatorship could be built simply with money. That is unless you are some Randian crakpot, in which case forget it.

      Even if the word "dictatorship" is a little strong, there is a valid point there. When "the community" consists of IBM, Novell, and Franz the student, obviously Franz's concerns are not going to carry the same weight as the other guys.

      There is still is a very strong mythos that the open source world consists of "Basement Hackers", but the reality now is that most of the important code comes from big corporations, or those being paid by big corporations (eg Linus). [This is somewhat intetional, with corporate contributions being sent in from vanity email addresses to somewhat diguise their true source.] Eventually the myth and the reality will collide.

    4. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by dragmorp · · Score: 1

      "One could argue that an effective dictatorship could be built simply with money." Go ahead and try. I would love to see what kind of mental acrobatics that would take. Of course... "one" could hypothetically argue anything unconvincingly.

    5. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No thanks, Mr. Troll. Take it to your journal where nobody will read it.

    6. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh please, just stop. If you have no appreciation for the history involved, then you're not going to be able to contribute to this in an informed way.

      Michael Tiemann is the founder of Cygnus Software (which was bought by Red Hat). If you want his OSS credentials, go to any copy of the GCC source and use grep. He's not heading this group because he's a corporate drone for Red Hat, he's heading this group because he's a better choice than ANY OF US!

    7. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I understand your fears, but Michael has devoted his life to open source first at Cygnus and later during the good old days when Red Hat before Fedora.

      He has been a great proponant and advocate or OSS all this time. I think he is probably one of the best choices for this post and I am comfortable with it.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    8. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by njcoder · · Score: 1
      There was a lot of talk about cutting down on the number of OSI approved licenses after Sun's CDDL was approved. There was a little talk last year but nothing as big as what's been happening now. Is there any conflict of interest now that an exec of RedHat runs OSI with regards to what OSI stamps as OpenSource and what licenses they decide to trim? There has been a lot of bad mouthing back and forth between Red Hat and Sun lately. Could they use their position to cut out the CDDL?

      I agree with you on how open source seems to be changing since the big guys stepped in.

      --
      Open Source Java DAO Generator
    9. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by njcoder · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, from a while back, there's this blog by Tiemann. And this report of the blogwar (Red Hat opens losing propaganda offensive against Sun) With Sun being one of the biggest contributors to open source, Red Hat being the biggest commercial linux distro, and OSI well... well at least it's not run by esr anymore... it would be nice to see the opensource/sun feuding end.

      --
      Open Source Java DAO Generator
    10. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Psiren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes he wrote teh C++ front-end, but almost all of the code he wrote is gone now, rewritten to be better. All of the code he wrote was crap code.

      That's entirely irrelavant and a stupid argument (if you can call it that). Presumably he wrote the code because at that point nobody else had. Just because it's since been rewritten does nothing to detract from his original contribution. You could claim that the current code is crap because it will be rewitten at some point in the future, and that too would be a stupid argument.

    11. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't know all this.

      I perceived him as an economic person because thats his function at Red Hat. I also read from him in Sun vs Linux threads. But i never knew he was actually a techie / developer...

    12. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See also his chapter in Open Sources: Voices from the open source revolution.

    13. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      Time for a 5-cent history lesson:
      Yes he wrote teh C++ front-end, but almost all of the code he wrote is gone now, rewritten to be better. All of the code he wrote was crap code.
      C++ also changed over time (going from its original implementation as the AT&T CFRONT pre-compiler for C, to a real compiler, and adding features). So of course, since the target evolved, the source would have to also.

      It doesn't invalidate that the old code he wrote did the job; he would probably do it differently today if he had to start from scratch, because our understanding of the problem domain is different, the problem domain has changed, and he's also evolved as a programmer.

      BTW, I'm sure if I looked at code I wrote 20 years ago, I'd say some of it is crap compared to what I write today. So what? If your code is the same today as it was years ago, all it means is you've stopped learning and started dying.

    14. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by ajs · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... not really.

      C-front had no bearing on GCC. There were, in fact, other true compilers for C++ before GCC, and GCC was never a C++-to-C translator like C-front. Did C-front back-end to gcc by default? I don't recall, but possibly. Still, it was never part of the GCC suite.

      I never heard anyone calling M.T.'s code crap at the time, but that's almost irrelevant. It's clear that, even if he's the worst programmer ever, he is so prolific (GDB works on C++ because of him) and so able to build community (he was the reason that GCC 3.0 happened) that it would be worth it.

      Was most of his code in GCC re-written? That would surprise me, but it's possible. 3.4 is a very different beast from 3.0, but 3.4 exists because of 3.0, and the state of stagnation that 2.95 was in when Tiemann (and his team at Cygnus) gave up and forked egcs to push the community forward was not going to produce 3.0 any time soon.

    15. Re:The beginning of corporate management of OSS? by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      Sorry for the misunderstanding - CFRONT was the original C++ compiler, by Stroustrup, and was a commercial product for several years before the first beta version of gcc.

      My point was that technology changes, and so does the code to implement it. If we have later versions that do better, it's only because we have prior versions that we can leverage.

      My point was that the criticism of the author (Tiemann) of those prior versions because they aren't "as good as" today's code is lame, unfair, and just throwing rocks for the sake of rock-throwing.

  10. Well said, well said! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I couldn't have said it better....

  11. Gary Winston by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Hey he looks like this guy.

  12. Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It's working for Mandrake and SUSE.

    Admit it. Red Hat just got fucking greedy and fucking stabbed the free software community in the back.

    Fortunately Fedora is such a piece of shit desktop Linux when compared to Mandrake, Gentoo or SUSE that it will never survive in the long term.

    1. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by teg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A couple of issues:

      • Red Hat is a major contributor to the open source community, by having enginers on a lot of projects.Bigger than SUSE, Mandrake and Gentoo are absent.
      • Fedora a POS? As far as I'm concerned, it's the best distribution available for me as a developer and a long time (10 years) Linux enthusiast. The major shortcoming is with servers, which I don't want to update or reinstall as often as a desktop/laptops.
      • Contrary to your statement, Red Hat is the one of these offering a free download - Fedora. Downloading something current from the others (for AMD64) is harder/not possible.
    2. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fedora good for desktop? Then why does Fedora desktop look like shit even when compared to the default Gentoo desktop?

    3. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by EngMedic · · Score: 2, Informative

      fedora would be great, save for two glaring errors. First, there are multiple, conflicting package repositories -- and you can't mix and match most of them safely. Second, though it's been promised since core 1, it's still not possible to update from core 1 to core 2 with just yum/apt (and likewise for core 2 - core 3), which means you're reinstalling and reconfiguring your OS every 6 months.

      --
      filter: +3. Hey, look! all the trolls went away!
    4. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fedora, like the original Red Hat is for Linux newbies. Everyone starts with Fedora/Red Hat and moves on to a better distro when they learn how to use Linux properly.

    5. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by m50d · · Score: 1
      Gentoo is a community thing that is hardly employing anyone, but the things they do maintain for themselves are often good and distro-independent-ish. I use gentoo kernels on slackware systems. Suse may not be doing that much but they're now open sourcing all that they do, remember if you're considering the whole company you should look at all the ximian stuff too.

      Fedora seems to have lost its focus, it's supposed to be community-oriented but comes out as just looking like red hat's beta that you're testing for them. Not saying it is, bu that's how it appears.

      AMD64 is a bit of an arbitrary choice imo. Anyway, SUSE is easy to download for AMD64, yes it doesn't include a few things but they have to leave them out for licensing reasons, it's better than having an entirely separate tree for the freely available version. Mandrake has a few months' delay, again imo better than a completely separate tree. Gentoo is a free download with no problems.

      --
      I am trolling
    6. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If Fedora is for newbies, then why does its GUI suck?

      Maybe it's just because I'm partial for KDE...

    7. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by WMD_88 · · Score: 1
      Downloading something current from the others (for AMD64) is harder/not possible.

      Ubuntu?

    8. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh I don't know... maybe Red Hat should try tweaking their CFLAGS a bit and recompiling the entire distro as -O9 -acefonts -greatartwork... just like G3nt00's l33t users.

    9. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I upgraded from core 1 to core 2 just by switching apt repositories. Though upgrading from core 2 to core 3 is supposed to be harder since they switched many of the major systems (like to udev).

    10. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err, no. I still use Fedora. I've been using RedHat since RedHat 4.2. Before that, I used Slackware. A lot of people stay on Fedora instead of moving to other distros.

    11. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The installer is also an upgrader, I've been upgrading systems in this way (which is a supported method) since RH 7.x, and I've met people who've been doing it much longer.

      To get from FC2 to FC3 I added a couple of lines to grub.conf, rebooted, chose a local server with FC3 ISOs, then clicked through a few screens, total upgrade time ~1 hour.

      I was then able to continue using the upgraded system while I examined the upgrade logs to see which config settings etc. might need changes for the vast quantity of upgraded software.

      In practise this isn't much different from being able to upgrade with apt or yum, both of which are possible but not supported.

    12. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Curtman · · Score: 1

      I use gentoo kernels on slackware systems.

      Really.. I don't even trust Gentoo kernels on Gentoo systems.

    13. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have upgraded a headless machine, halfway across the country, with no console port access, from FC1 to FC2 via yum. Seth Vidal (who wrote yum) has some notes here . Yes, you will have issues if you boot from LVM or have a ton of rpms installed by hand.

      As far as the conflicting repos, that is a feature of the repo, not fedora.

    14. Re:Red Hat stabbed us in the back by teg · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu?

      I was having SUSE and Mandrake in mind.

  13. Russ has gotten some heat.. by bhsx · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder if this petition has anything to do with this decision? For the uninitiated, Russ wrote on his blog (and since removed it) about corporate black culture, in an article titled "Blacks are Lazy."
    Here's the google cache of the withdrawn article.

    --
    put the what in the where?
    1. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by js7a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Russ himself signed the petition; acording to the petition's author, tomhudson, he emailed to confirm his signature.

    2. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by jeffehobbs · · Score: 1


      That article is poorly written with a sensationalist title -- but not inherently rascist. At the base of it, he's advocating equal pay for equal work regardless of race, not calling black people lazy.

      ~jeff

    3. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by ajs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's an interesting article with a fairly cogent -- if subjective -- thought about socio-economic origins of prejudice... and yet it's said with all the tact of a true geek. Heh.

      Well, at least he understood that people were not taking it as intended, and took it down. Quite a few people around here would have left it up, saying, "what's the big deal?"

    4. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by greenrd · · Score: 2, Informative
      he's advocating equal pay for equal work regardless of race, not calling black people lazy.

      Um, yes he is. You can't spin away the title of the goddamned post.

      --
      Female Prison Rape in NY
    5. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nelson says Black people are lazy in that they work less hard than whites.

      Let's see, there's absolutely no evidence for this conclusion to be found, therefore the entire premises is built on a prejudice. For an "economist", he certainly demonstrates completely shoddy social scientific methodology.

      Had he posted "Blacks are stupid blahblahblahblah" it would have been equally racist, but at least he could cite some widely published IQ studies.

      It's pretty easy not to come off as a hood-wearing klucker, just don't make blanket statements such as "(Porchmonkeys) are lazy". Only a racist would have posted that article.

    6. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by zerblat · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Not that I agree with Russ's opinions or in any way am sad that he won't be leading the OSI, but if you actually read what he wrote it's clear that he meant the title to be provocative, but not racist as in "black people are lazy because of their genetics".

      Of course, it was still a stupid and insensitive title. As a public figure you always have to think about what you say and write and expect people to interpret things the wrong way.

      --
      Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
    7. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the google cache that you provided? A hugely important part of that article is saying, in essence, that if you pay black people less for the same work, don't be surprised if they choose to work less. Leisure time becomes more valuable than that work!

      It's a pity that something criticizing racism can be seen as racist. I guess it's just easier to jump to conclusions than to think.

    8. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -1, Troll yourself

    9. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      This reminds me a little of Philip Greenspun's memo comparing software development to a Nazi concentration camp.

      Nelson seems to be saying that if you're paid less, there is less incentive to give up leisure time for work. But the flaw in this argument is that if you have less money you need it more, so you may have to work harder and for longer simply _because_ you are paid less. This also applies to taxation: some argue that high income taxes hurt the economy by reducing the incentive to work, but others retort that if you tax the well-off harder, they will work more to compensate.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    10. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Matt+Perry · · Score: 0
      You can't spin away the title of the goddamned post.
      I guess that makes Bow, Nigger racist too, even though it's been twice linked to in a front page Slashdot article and held up as an example of excellent games journalism. Yes, let's judge on the title rather than the content.

      To Russ Nelson's credit he realized that the post wasn't a good idea, pulled it, and then posted a public apology. The man has already admitted that he was wrong. What more do you want?

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    11. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by js7a · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think the main problem people had with the essay (other than the inflammitory title) were these two sentences:
      Actually, come to think about it, we had about 150 years of black slavery, and it hasn't even been 150 years since the Civil War. It wouldn't surprise me to find that blacks are still taught to value their leisure time more highly than whites.
      Not only does this show a lack of understanding of history (slave ships had begun British colony trade at Jamestown by 1620, and were involved with Spanish colonies in North America at least 50 years before that), but the idea that one's value of leisure time is handed down from generation to generation is profoundly anti-individualist and deepl racist on its face.

      I've never met Russ, but after reading his blog I get the impression that he is someone I might like to know (and convince to think about what he writes a little while longer before he writes it), but he is far too outspoken to serve as a figurehead for an organization frequently targeted by professional PR flacks (e.g. Microsoft's.) I don't wish him any ill will, but I think he made the right choice here.

    12. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Chmarr · · Score: 1

      And, the flaw in YOUR argument is you're stating that by simply working harder, you'll get paid more.

      That might happen over time, through raises and bonuses, etc., but if one percerives one is ALWAYS going to get paid less for the same work, the natural response is to say "fuck it, I'm just going to work as much as my remuneration suggests."

    13. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Please, can you forgive people for being incidentally blunt or do you always expect & pretend sterilized politically correct statements? Listen, the guy worded it a bit backwards, but he's just saying that in a heavily discriminated community only the most determined folks will have "success" while most will drop the towel and seek fulfillment in other aspects of life. Objectively, a middle class, good family (9/10 times, white) male (there's that detail too) really has to try hard to screw his life into becoming a janitor; he's not just brighter, he's priviledged. Fire a campaign for a blunt, but correct and un-racist, statement makes me think it's a pretext.

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    14. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      but the idea that one's value of leisure time is handed down from generation to generation is profoundly anti-individualist and deepl racist on its face.
      Uh, how is stating that values are often passed down through the family even beginning to be anti-individualist and racist? Look at yourself, I can guarantee that you have at least some traits of your partents (I'm not talking genetics here).
    15. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      I don't know if it had anything directly to do with the decision, but I know I felt, and a lot of people felt, coming on top of remarks Nelson had made in the original Slashdot thread announcing his appointment, that it demonstrated a lack of the diplomatic skills needed for the figurehead representing a major advocacy group. FWIW, I was one of the people who drew attention to this particular posting, via my journal. (I may have been the first to do so publicly, I'm not sure)

      Regardless of whether Nelson thinks blacks, as a group (for genetic or, as he appeared to argue, economic reasons), really are lazy or whether he meant it to be read that way, it was clearly representative of a mindset that wasn't going to win over new friends. I, personally, was relieved he withdrew the article, as it was a step in the right direction, but knowing Russ Nelson's argumentative skills in general, I'm more relieved he's no longer in that position.

      This is not to suggest Russ is evil, or an idiot, or anything like that; it's just some people are suited to some jobs and not others. I'd make a crap OSI President too. I suspect Jack Valenti would have made an awful movie maker, but he was highly influential as an MPAA president (regretably!) Hopefully the new OSI leadership will be an obvious improvement.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    16. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by greenrd · · Score: 1
      If you can't see the difference between "blacks are lazy" and "nigger", you really shouldn't be commenting on this issue.

      --
      Female Prison Rape in NY
    17. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ~50 times signed...

    18. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by mauriceh · · Score: 1

      Here is the counter petition

      Do yourself a favour and make a statement supporting freedom of speech by signing this petition, please.

      --
      Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
    19. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by SimianOverlord · · Score: 1

      Did you read the criticism that you are responding to? A hugely important part of that criticism is saying, in essence, that if you make racist assumptions, even justified by economic arguments, don't be surprised if people criticise you.

      It's a pity that something racist can be defended by asserting the intentions weren't racist, or that the final conclusion, removed from its troubling context, is economically sound. I guess it's just easier to jump to someones defence than to think.

      --
      Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
    20. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of working longer hours to earn more. This simple model doesn't always apply in the real world because many jobs are not paid by the hour.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    21. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      A fundamental problem with the article was that the entire thing relied upon the title being fundamentally correct. This is something those trying to explain it away have tended to ignore. I don't see any evidence that blacks, as a group, actually are lazy. But Nelson's column goes into detail as to why they're lazy without actually backing up the assertion that they actually are to begin with. The headline is an underlying accusation that's implied by the argument, not contradicted by it.

      You don't explain why blacks are lazy if you don't think they're lazy to begin with.

      Of course, Nelson clearly believed, when writing it, that his motive was reasonable and anti-racist, that comes out too.

      I agree completely with your second paragraph. For me, this article was the final straw. I'd seen the confrontational attitude he'd taken about concerns from the free software crowd. Now he'd written and published publically an objectively racist article, one that even if he failed to understand his own written argument, he could have seen was unnecessarily insensitive and inherently insulting to a large group of people. He clearly wasn't the right person to be the public face of an advocacy organization (at least, not one whose views I broadly agree with.) That role requires diplomacy and tact.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    22. Re:Russ has gotten some heat.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      You say that, but it's interesting how many people I know working two or three jobs at the moment, all of whom are on low incomes and are working the extra jobs precisely because they're on low incomes.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  14. This is why... by Spoing · · Score: 1
    I am a fan of Michael Tiemann.

    While focusing on open source and Red Hat's take on it, the main concepts can be used so many places -- OSS or not. Watch it a couple times to really have it sink in; it's deceptively simple though the 'common wisdom' is to discard these ideas when 'reality' shows up (aka resistant managers who have gotten used to the status quo.).

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
  15. Re:I Consider that red hat ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please point me to the clause in the GPL that states you can not sell "Free Software".

    Also can you provide links to the places Redhat is bashing other linux distros, or saying that Free Software has no support? Cause I've never seen it.

  16. If some taxonomy is required ... by foobsr · · Score: 1

    Trolls

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  17. Re:I Consider that red hat ... by teg · · Score: 1

    Red Hat, Also sells propietary software, but they don't develop it.

    This is so far from the truth as you can possibly be: Red Hat is a huge contributor to open software (GNOME, glibc, kernel, gcc and a ton of other things). And they don't sell proprietary software.

  18. Fucking troll! by nlinecomputers · · Score: 1

    You are a fucking troll. Please show me where in the GPL is says you can't sell Free Software? Please show me where RMS has retracted statements saying that you can't sell Free Software? How can you steal a project that is given away for free? How does that stop you from continuing your own development work? And how is RH proprietary? All the source code is downloadable. How do think sanitized versions of RHEL from CentOS arrive? If you have a beef with RH then spell it out. State the real problem or sit down, STFU, and read the damn GPL. This is bullshit covering for a real issue or you are just plain stupid.

    --
    Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
    1. Re:Fucking troll! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC RHEL etc have some proprietary stuff in them.

      However, unless I am mistaken, most of those are included simply because of a lack of a suitable open version.

      One only has to look at the open source JRE included with Fedora 3 to see what I am talking about.

    2. Re:Fucking troll! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're all wet WRT Red Hat, but whatever. I just wanted to point out that you've used "propietary" consistently in at least two posts. I hope you won't mind a correction: it's "proprietary". Note the extra "r".

    3. Re:Fucking troll! by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 0, Troll

      Ok, let's just drop the deadrat discussion where it is ...

      About Proprietary Vs. Propietary, i know it's written Proprietary, but my native language is Spanish, and in Spanish it's "Propietario", without the "r", and, yes, it's a word that i use a lot, sadly, and so i usually write it in english the way it's written in spanish ... it's just stronger than me :)

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
  19. Not familiar with OSS licenses? by highcon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you were, you would realize the potential of anyone to "control" an OSS project. All it takes is work. Evidently these big corporations have a stake and are willing to put in the work to improve this software. That doesn't mean you or I cannot take their improvements and use them however we want, including throwing them out. No one can truly control an OSS project. Their control is tenuous and based on the acceptance of the users of their software. If they screw it up, somebody takes the good bits, starts their own project, and does it right. The users flock to the one they prefer.

    --
    You can either complain, or do nothing. You don't get both.
  20. I knew Michael Tiemann in college by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 3, Interesting
    His brother Bruce was a classman in Ricketts house at caltech. Bruce majored in chemistry, and had an interest in laser dyes. I'd visit Bruce at home during vacations, when their father was a visiting professor at Stanford, and got to know Michael that way.

    You could tell early on he was going to go far. He had a microcomputer he had soldered together himself from components, and ran a prolog interpreter on. It was the first I ever saw prolog.

    Funny little anecdote, I decided to try out photography after dropping out of Caltech, so Bruce lent me Michael's very expensive Canon A-1 SLR camera. It would accurately meter a thirty second exposure at night.

    The photos on this page of my article Living with Schizoaffective Disorder were taken with Michael Tiemann's camera.

    I've lost touch with them over the years though.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
    1. Re:I knew Michael Tiemann in college by thephotoman · · Score: 1

      Funny little anecdote, I decided to try out photography after dropping out of Caltech, so Bruce lent me Michael's very expensive Canon A-1 SLR camera. It would accurately meter a thirty second exposure at night.

      This is incredibly off-topic, I know, but I'm drooling over that statement.

      Sounds like a cool guy, though.

      --
      Haec merda tauri est. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
  21. Gentoo has the best AMD64 support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gentoo's AMD64 support is the best there is right now. It's free and practically perfect. Mandrake crashes, SUSE can't be downloaded for free and Fedora fucks up my SCSI RAID.

  22. PARENT IS NNSFW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Parent is not not safe for work! Beware!

  23. I consider you... by juhaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    an idiot. I've probable been trolled, though. But just in case you're just ignorant beyond belief...

    Red Hat, Also sells propietary software, but they don't develop it.

    Red Hat does not sell proprietary software. You're accidentally right about them not developing it, though, since RH only develops free software. Plenty of it.

    also, they make bad publicity for GNU, since they bash most distributions in favor of their own, they spread FUD about Free Software having no support

    Right. Developing lots of free software to make it better creates bad publicity. You'd be hard pressed to find Red Hat spreading any FUD, unlike you, they don't need to. For anyone with more than two brain cells and their eyes open, their position with Ubuntu, for example, is friendly competition. Only animosity with competitors that I can remember was with Sun, and not all that surprisingly, started by Sun. As for support... Red Hat's business model consists of selling support for Free Software, no need to say more.

    But redhat, doesn't develop anything

    You mean aside from employing top kernel hackers, top gcc hackers and top gnome hackers? RH has also invested heavily on gcj to help us gain a Free Java implementation. I'm sure those people would still contribute whatever scraps of free time they had from they day job to FOSS if they hadn't got a job at RH, now, they have a change to do so fulltime without worrying about their jobs. Not to mention purchasing several companies and releasing their previously proprietary applications for free, what an evil thing to do!

    Red Hat's contributions to FOSS are among the greatest of any company, ever, and they continue to do that despite your drivel.

    They also use our name (Free Software and Open Source Software) as a selling point.

    They have every right in the world to describe their stuff as Free Software, since that's precisely what it is.

    I'd also be careful about using forms of word "we" when talking about Free Software, since I happen to think you haven't ever contributed one line of code, or anything else for that matter, in your life. Anyone who had, wouldn't be so ignorant as to spread this kind of baseless FUD. Jumped from Windows last week probably, and now you think you know everything there is to know about Free Software? Well, here's the newsflash: you don't.

    1. Re:I consider you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Only animosity with competitors that I can remember was with Sun, and not all that surprisingly, started by Sun."

      Interesting. Sun used to do this with MS but after that 'deal' with MS the targets appear to be IBM and Red Hat. Surprisingly, not Novell.

    2. Re:I consider you... by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      Red Hat does not sell proprietary software. You're accidentally right about them not developing it, though, since RH only develops free software. Plenty of it.

      I keep hearing that in these redhat threads. Can you give me some examples?

    3. Re:I consider you... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      Can you give me some examples?

      There are several here. Not including the projects RH employees contribute to which they don't host.

    4. Re:I consider you... by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      The site appears to be a hosting site:

      sources.redhat.com hosts GNU packages and other outside projects as a favor to the developers. These are not Red Hat products, and Red Hat doesn't decide what to put in them, but Red Hat is proud to help them out with facilities and, in some cases, by contributions of code.

      Looks like the code contributions are at best a secondary function of that site. What contributions of code, exactly?

    5. Re:I consider you... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      What contributions of code, exactly?

      Lots of them. They are pretty easy to find actually. pick a project and look through its changelog.

  24. It's about time by KingOfTheNerds · · Score: 1

    It's about time they upgraded Michael to president, he's been in the deal long enough to deserve the promotion and I think it will lend a lot to the open source movement. Since OSI is taking on more work these days they're expanding their board. Only specualtion can tell us who they're going to bring in next, will it be Bob Rose? Hopefully, but we'll see how it plays out. Go Open Source!

    --
    Want to learn about anything sexual? Check out the sex wiki:
  25. Re:A dictatorship requires guns. by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

    A dictatorship requires guns.

    That's what the law is all about. You buy a law, you get the guns to back it up thrown in for free.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  26. G++ bugs by norwoodites · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Really Tiemann needs to fix more G++ bugs which he introduced when he wrote the code. The code has many slow places where he used a crapy O(n^2) algorithm instead of an O(n) one.

    1. Re:G++ bugs by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      If you are so sure about the design errors and what would be the best way to correct them, why are you posting flames on slashdot instead of submitting patches to the g++ project?

      Leave Tiemann alone. His contributions may not be the best (at your eyes, at least) but he is contributing *a lot* to the community. Let's praise what he did/does and not bad-mouth his effords.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    2. Re:G++ bugs by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      I do contribute to GCC, look for my name in ChangeLog. I am also a GCC bug master who goes through each and every new bug which is opened so I know where the problems are usually.

      And my first comments were supposed to be taken as a joke and not seriously.

    3. Re:G++ bugs by dont_think_twice · · Score: 1

      And my first comments were supposed to be taken as a joke and not seriously.

      Reading your first comment, I assumed you were som 14 year old kid just trolling. There was no way to tell from your post that you were joking.

  27. I signed it, too. by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For what it's worth, I signed the petition also, and the sponsor withdrew his accusation of racism.
    -russ

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  28. MOD PARENT UP by Feztaa · · Score: 1

    I've been a happy fedora user since FC1 was released, and never understood why everybody bitches about Red Hat.

  29. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...are you still a fucking racist? As a black person, I took issue with what you said about blacks being lazy.

    1. Re:So... by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      No, the other racists were ashamed of me. They found out that I don't actually think blacks are lazy. Since I've offered to apologize to anyone who calls my cellphone at 315-323-1241, they ripped up my membership card and kicked me out.
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people prefer postitive discrimination over equal reasoning.

  30. I didn't say he was racist... by bhsx · · Score: 1

    I simply laid out the facts to allow people to draw their own conclusions. The fact is, he has been getting a lot of heat about the article. I simply questioned whether the two incidents are possibly related.
    No need to be so knee-jerk.

    --
    put the what in the where?
  31. A Red Hat exec in the position? by petrus4 · · Score: 1

    NOT a good idea. Has anyone else here heard of the term "conflict of interests" before?

    The OSI IMHO should most certainly NOT be either directly commercial, or allow any commercial entity to use it in order to advance their own cause. I'm not sure how they're meant to avoid that happening if they start putting corporate staff in leadership positions.

  32. Hi Russ! by bhsx · · Score: 1

    I'm glad you joined in the conversation. I hope that you noticed that I didn't have anything negative to say, just providing some info and posing a question.
    Can you comment on the relation of the two incidents (if there is any)? Have you been getting internal pressures from Bruce and company to stand down? I'm not trying to drag anyone through the mud or anything, I'm honestly just very curious.
    By the way, I think the only mistake that was made was taking down the original article. Sometimes you need to shake things up in order to get people to really think about a subject like the one you were attempting to tackle. Censoring yourself after the fact seems like a poor choice to me.

    --
    put the what in the where?
  33. OSI sells out to be "politically correct" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is sad.
    Apparently "freedom of speech" is now officially dead in the USA.

    It is also like letting the fox loose in the henhouse.
    I feel Red Hat already has far more power in the Linux OS realm than is healthy.

  34. hypoxia by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1, Interesting

    After the last Red Hat article, I did a bit of studying on Fedora and Red Hat (represented by Centos 4.0). The results were quite interesting.

    Fedora is pitched as the beta testing project for Red Hat. Stuff that gets into Red Hat Enterprise is supposed to be proven in Fedora. If you look at the actual packages in each distribution, however, it is interesting to note that RHEL 4.0 actually has newer stuff than Fedora core 3. If Fedora leads to RHEL, how can this be? Has Red Hat, having jettisoned its community goodwill and developer support, been forced to fork RHEL in order to keep it current and supported? Could they be reducing the packages in RHEL in order to keep it supportable and current in what is a dying bid to tide the platform over until Fedora gets enough oxygen to live on its own, much less support the RHEL product? Is RHEL itself a smoke and mirrors operation - an unstable solution inferior even to Fedora that is part of a two pronged marketing operation to capitalize on the Red Hat name at the expense of the quality of their product? Is Fedora the true core of Red Hat, as directly indicated by Red Hat engineers commenting vociferously in the past couple of stories about this? Perhaps Red Hat has realized, as the air sucks slowly out of the room, that the best long term investment of dwindling oxygen supplies is to devote them to Fedora, because Fedora is the only hope for the future of the company. Certainly a closed linux distribution, forked from the roots of the original Red Hat Linux or Fedora, cannot be sustainable in the long term.

    It looks like they wanted us to pull their gravy train for them by beta testing Fedora on our production systems and servers, and now that we haven't done it, they are cannibalizing their internal support and engineering resources to maintain what little momentum still exists in the Red Hat machine until they find the right Open Source affairs guy to get the Fedora engine to "kick in", as it were.

    Sad.

  35. WTF are you talking about? by melted · · Score: 1

    Fedora at this point is the best distro out there. It has the best installer, it has SELinux, it even has decent i18n support (Ubuntu, are you listening?). You install it and it "just works" (tm) and that's about all I want from a Linux distro. I run a personal web server off of my DSL connection and I don't have time and desire to spend my nights and weekends recompiling the kernel, putting in SELinux and trying to set up non-US locale. I can do all of this, but why should I in year 2005?

  36. Free download for AMD64 by Donny+Smith · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    > Contrary to your statement, Red Hat is the one of these offering a free download - Fedora. Downloading something current from the others (for AMD64) is harder/not possible.

    Riiiight...

    Folks, get a DVD or CD torrent download here:
    http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article. php?sto ryid=70

  37. FC and RHEL come from rawhide by Sits · · Score: 1

    RHEL4 has plenty of its packages based off those in FC3 but my understanding is that is that the packages for both FC and RHEL come from rawhide. Now because FC3 isn't a rolling distro (in the same way as something like Gentoo or Debian unstable) there are things in rawhide that MAY never make their way into FC3 because they came out after FC3 was released. However those packages (or some future version) will turn up in FC4.

    So if one assumes that RHEL4 was based off rawhide and rawhide had progressed past FC3 then you would wind up with later packages in RHEL4. No conspiracy I'm afraid (try a different studying technique next time ;). It would also suggest that the packages in FC4 will be the same or newer than those in RHEL4...

    A RHEL's purpose is to be a static platform for X years. It gets a few security and bug fixes and that's about it. Nowt to do with oxygen, rail travel or eating ones own kind - just that subscription paid support allows the expensive and boring process of backporting to be done for yearly releases.

    Oh yeah, don't say "closed" by itself in reference to software unless you mean the source code is closed - you are muddying the waters. Having the source code available is precisely why projects like CentOS and Whitebox exist and saying RHEL is closed comes across purposefully confusing with the intent to mislead.

    1. Re:FC and RHEL come from rawhide by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      So if one assumes that RHEL4 was based off rawhide and rawhide had progressed past FC3 then you would wind up with later packages in RHEL4. No conspiracy I'm afraid (try a different studying technique next time ;).

      If RHEL draws its lineage from rawhide rather than Fedora, then what exactly is Fedora?

  38. What do you mean? by Sits · · Score: 1

    Examples of what? Examples of them *selling* non-proprietary software (which raises the question "does RH sell software or do they sell support?")? Or examples of them *developing* non-proprietary software?

    Remember though, for software to be proprietary you need to be able to (legally) *prevent sharing and use of the source*. If you can do that it's not proprietary because ownership is no longer under only your control.

  39. What is Fedora? by Sits · · Score: 1

    I am answering this from a package only point of view and this is MY understanding - it may not be correct (ask someone from Red Hat, it might be that RHEL really is branched from a Fedora). Since you mentioned RHEL we can turn it round and say what is RHEL? RHEL is mostly a branch of rawhide + non Red Hat packages. Fedora Core (note the Core) is completely a branch of rawhide (as in "all Fedora Core packages are/were in rawhide", not "all of rawhide is in Fedora Core") and the RHEL branch is often taken at a similar (but not identical) point to that of the most recent Fedora. Where appropriate branch fixes make their way back to the trunk and other branches. Parts of the Fedora branch may also "rebase".

    Fedora is basically (gross simplification) a more branched version of rawhide than RHEL.

    There are bunch of other things that make Fedora which I deleted from this post (I cut it down considerably because I don't have room to cover them all).