Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Releases RHEL 6 Public Beta 1
An anonymous reader writes "It was way back on 2006-09-07 when Red Hat released its first public beta of Enterprise Linux 5. Today, after more than three years, Red Hat finally releases its first public beta of its next-generation OS: RHEL 6 public beta 1. From the news release: 'We are excited to share with you news of our first public step toward our next major Red Hat Enterprise Linux platform release with today's Beta availability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. Beginning today, we are inviting our customers, partners, and members of the public to install, test, and provide feedback for what we expect will be one of our most ambitious and important operating platform releases to date. This blog is the first in a series of upcoming posts that will cover different aspects of the new platform.'"
We have an environment with AMD Opteron 270 based servers where we use virtualization heavily. We either have to give up on the servers or on RHEL 6. I think that we'll stick with EL5 until we go into a server refresh cycle.
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
better pricing
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/rhel/beta/6/
Or torrent it:
http://www.torrentreactor.net/torrents/5568298/RHEL-6-Beta-64-Bit
Don't forget to check the sha1sum, which can be verified on the first address:
e0a3a906d7bbbc57b411a213bd5d6ad44d851689 RHEL6.0-20100414.0-AP-x86_64-DVD1.iso
.sig: No such file or directory
The packages mostly match those in Fedora 12, which makes sense as that came out in November and FC13 isn't released yet. However, they have bumped some things. Most notably, the FC12 kernel was 2.6.31, while RHEL6 uses 2.6.32. That's not surprising given a fair number of virtualization and performance features, as well as bug fixes, happened for 2.6.32.
I can confirm that. I was told by a guy from Red Hat recently that it's based on FC12 with some things from FC13 included.
I don't know, ibiblio is kind of legit. Red Hat didn't feel like releasing a torrent, since they don't have a tracker lying around.
The Citrix stuff had little to do with it. Th Linux kernel developers favor code that is easy for them to integrate and maintain, and KVM fit better into that model than Xen. There are some situations where it performs quite a bit better too, and frankly few people care about those stuck with processors that don't have the right extensions to use KVM. Some good reading on the background here includes Discover the Linux Kernel Virtual Machine, Linux: KVM Paravirtualization, and The truth about KVM and Xen.
Actually I didn't quite understand if the favored linux virtualization code switched from xen to kvm because of Citrix buying xen and messing with the project, or some other reason.
KVM is Linux, XEN isn't Linux. Redhat is a Linux vendor so prefers Linux over things that are not Linux.
It's not a matter of one being better than the other but a matter of picking one that's closer to what you already know.
This is the attitude that makes commercial open-source so difficult. Until Redhat employ every developer whose code is used in their distro, you can accuse them of freeloading. Redhat contribute to a variety of core packages, including the kernel. That's enough to keep me happy. I'm not saying they're perfect, but they're not bad. The very existence of CentOS should show that they're sticking to the GPL. But you also have to remember is all those patches that go back upstream, and appear in Debian, SuSE and the rest.
Thank you backwardMechanic. Calling RedHat freeloaders is completely ignoring all the contributions they made to OpenSource. They did not write 100% of the code that RHEL runs on but they did fix a lot of issues that would never be taken cared off by the upstream project for lack of coolness. The reality today is that the Kernel is mostly developed by programmers paid by large corporations such as RedHat. Same goes for Novell who employs a lot of opensource hackers.