It's both. Having them run in kernel space means a web browser crash can bring down the whole kernel. Having them run as root means an exploit can give access to the entire system. Either one without the other is bad, but together they are the sux0r.
Stop being an apologist for Bill Gates. When he pays for clean water and sanitation for every human being on the planet {and he wouldn't even notice it} or performs some similar act for the greater human good {this would not include hara-kiri - given the mess he would be leaving behind, that would be too much like a coward's way out} then he'll have earned a little of my respect.
Maybe this is a troll, but I'll bite...
Last I checked, Bill Gates was performing similar acts for the greater human good. He's one of the most prolific charitable contributors in history. If you check out the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation you'll notice that they have poured billions of dollars into global health projects. According to their annual financial report for 2002 they gave away over $1Bn last year alone.
How is that a troll?! This is a valid, lucid response to a troll. Many times over Bill Gates has given away more money than I will see in my entire lifetime. It's an undeniable fact.
Are you sure? As a result of whichever court saying the FCC doesn't have police powers in this are the FTC was given authorization to enforce the FCC's national do-not-call list.
Yes, I could build my own from the Fedora sources, but if my goal is to prototype a web service I really don't want to waste time building the distro.
Why would you build your own? Fedora Core is complete with the Anaconda installer, chkconfig, and all the redhat-config-* packages, which I expect to be renamed to fedora-config-*. Those are really the things that define a Red Hat Linux, that and the consistent look/feel between gnome and kde, which is also present in Fedora Core. Pretend that Fedora Core is still called Red Hat Linux, but it's now open to having official packages maintained by volunteers (like debian).
They could have simply done away with the free side of RHN, that would have solved the problem.Well, then people would have bitched about that. By effecting this split, you get free updates from the volunteer maintainers in Fedora Core. You get updates from your paid RHN subscription in RHEL. So, even if the updates are available for free from demo RHN accounts for Fedora Core boxes, they're not paying their employees to keep backporting patches to 5 different releases. So in a way, they kinda did do away with the free side of RHN, they just did it by putting the maintenance work on volunteers rather than by cutting off free access to the system.
people develop redhat's systems for free and RedHat turns around to sell it. For a very high price
What was your opinion of the distributions from Progeny and Corel? They both took debian, added their own install and config utils and sold it for profit. That's exactly what Red Hat is doing, only in the reverse direction. They're taking RHL, which was an internal distribution, and releasing it to the community. So now a network of volunteers get to work on the core disitrbution, and Red Hat gets to focus on the apps they contribute to make RHEL.
The up2date client supports yum and apt repositories now, and RH yumified RawHide, which is how the FC betas have been receiving updates since the test2 release date. fedora.us and freshrpms.net have been keeping their apt repos current to varying degrees. fedora.us has the initial releases, but freshrpms.net has the rawhide repo. I'm confident that when when Fedora Core 1 is released, both fedora.us and freshrpms.net will have their full apt repositories carreid over, and updates will continue to be released through them.
I can accept that. You see the distinction that we're still getting the same product, just with a different label, and contributions from more people. Lone_marauder seemed to be saying that the community was going to be cut off from the content itself.
There are also no real junk mail controls, at least not on par with thunderbird
Amen to that. I was getting close to switching to Evolution for palm synching until I reliased it still doesn't have a bayesian filter like moz/thunderbird. The vFolders in evolution are great, but they don't fit the bill for this task for me. I especially like the trash vfolder in Evolution. I find moz/thunderbird a little irritating on this point. If I delete an email and it is moved to the trash folder, it's still in the original folder, just marked for deletion. This behavior extends to filters, so I've had issues with mail checking utilities telling me I have new mail when I don't (unread mail marked for deletion because a filter 'moved' it to a different folder). But the junk filters are worth that hassle.
Almost forgot, where do you think the packages that go into RHEL are coming from? Think of Fedora Core as Debian unstable, and RHEL as Debian stable with commercial support contracts and extra administration tools from a corporation.
Are you banking that readers/moderators will not bother to read the message you linked to?
Actually I was quite hoping you would, I don't care if the moderators do, I linked it for you.
Of course Fedora will be available in public CVS.
This move has no impact on the availability of RHEL products, only on the availability of free versions of Red Hat, which have become Fedora. You stated the community is having access taken away, I don't see how that is the case, nor do I see how the link I provided fails to reinforce my position. If you want to talk strictly about RHEL for a minute, are you aware that all the SRPMs for GPL packages, and updates to those packages, are available for free download from ftp.redhat.com? That's not changing.
So, I ask what access to the Red Hat line is the community loosing?
Tool vendors just recently started porting their apps to Linux (for the most part they picked RH, sometimes SuSE also).
I know, I was speaking strictly in terms of which Linux disrtibutions are supported, not comparing Linux to commercial Unix. Other than SUSE, I can think of no other Linux distribution with official support for such marque commercial applications.
We could buy a single set and copy the hell out of it, but thats probably forbidden somewhere (yes/no?)
In a manner of speaking. If you want the support contract, you have to license it for all the machines. If you don't want the support contract, you can install it on every machine you like with reckless abandon. I'm not sure how updates are handled for unregistered installations of RHEL.
I no longer have any dedication to them for their adherence to the GPL.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that RH follows the GPL more than SUSE, but that no longer sways you? That's whay I think you're saying. You're not saying you no longer support them because of the "adherence to the GPL" as though RH is somehow now less in compliance than before, are you? If so, please explain.
Last I checked, $179 was cheaper than Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP Pro. So for an Enterprise workstation, it seems priced rather competitively to me. $100 was loosing them money in the long run. I read something on the fedora-test-list mailing list about a professional workstation, which I think was going to be a trimmed down RHEL AW that you could get at Best Buy. but nobody, including the RH employees reading the list knew [or was allowed to yet admit they knew] anything about it.
They used the community to build a platform to which the community will no longer have access
That's just flat-out wrong. Just look here and notice that Michael Johnson, who speaks on behalf of Red Hat, announcing "The next major change will almost certainly be maintaining packages in public CVS". So how exactly is the communicty having access taken away?
well, WH was providing backports of security patches to multiple versions of the same packages, and making it all available in free binary downloads. It costs a lot of money (the time to backport so many times and the bandwidth to serve it all). the main effect is the free binary iso images and free binary updates. That will be transitioned from Red Hat to the Fedora community as a whole. Still available, just not necessarily from redhat.com servers. The RHEL stuff will have no change in availability. You can still download all the GPL source and the source to the updates. (They didn't release free binary downloads of RHEL to begin with).
Do you have a moral objection to Debian being maintained by volunteers. Red Hat is transitioning their free distribution to the same model. Red Hat will pay their employees to maintain and package their code. In the meantime, joe volunteer is now able to step up to the plate and maintain official packages for his favorite application which RH doesn't include. For example, RH doesn't offer the linux-wlan-ng software, but someone already maintains RPMs of it built for RH. He now has a framework to have his work included as part of Fedora Core. Sounds like a win for both sides to me.
Why should I buy RedHat rather than HP or Sun or even a free Linux distribution?
You would use RHEL over a competing Linux distro mainly for the strong support of other software vendors like Oracle, and IBM (Java, WebSphere Studio, ClearCase). Sure these applications will most likely work on other distros, but the systems are already designed to play nicely with RHEL and vice versa. There's also the backported security patches for 5 years. You won't have to upgrade to a new release of openssh when 5 exploits are released in the span of one week next year, you just get the patches backported to your current version by RedHat, typically in less than 12 hours. And if you have 100 servers, I'd take RHN over apt-get. You just log onto rhn.redhat.com, identify which patches to apply (you can apply them to all affected servers or a subset you define), and the machines all upgrade themselves from one handy administrative interface. I'm not aware of such an interface for any other distro. You can delegate privileges to multiple users too.
Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates: I seirously doubt it. This place is air conditioned.
Bounty Hunter throws toothpick at Bill, killing fly inches away from his face.
It's both. Having them run in kernel space means a web browser crash can bring down the whole kernel. Having them run as root means an exploit can give access to the entire system. Either one without the other is bad, but together they are the sux0r.
Are you sure? As a result of whichever court saying the FCC doesn't have police powers in this are the FTC was given authorization to enforce the FCC's national do-not-call list.
So it is, my mistake.
it should work just fine, it's the same Anaconda we know and love. All the RH tools you know from RHL are still part of FC.
Why would you build your own? Fedora Core is complete with the Anaconda installer, chkconfig, and all the redhat-config-* packages, which I expect to be renamed to fedora-config-*. Those are really the things that define a Red Hat Linux, that and the consistent look/feel between gnome and kde, which is also present in Fedora Core. Pretend that Fedora Core is still called Red Hat Linux, but it's now open to having official packages maintained by volunteers (like debian).
They could have simply done away with the free side of RHN, that would have solved the problem.Well, then people would have bitched about that. By effecting this split, you get free updates from the volunteer maintainers in Fedora Core. You get updates from your paid RHN subscription in RHEL. So, even if the updates are available for free from demo RHN accounts for Fedora Core boxes, they're not paying their employees to keep backporting patches to 5 different releases. So in a way, they kinda did do away with the free side of RHN, they just did it by putting the maintenance work on volunteers rather than by cutting off free access to the system.
sweet! AFAIK that's my first sig complement!
What was your opinion of the distributions from Progeny and Corel? They both took debian, added their own install and config utils and sold it for profit. That's exactly what Red Hat is doing, only in the reverse direction. They're taking RHL, which was an internal distribution, and releasing it to the community. So now a network of volunteers get to work on the core disitrbution, and Red Hat gets to focus on the apps they contribute to make RHEL.
The up2date client supports yum and apt repositories now, and RH yumified RawHide, which is how the FC betas have been receiving updates since the test2 release date. fedora.us and freshrpms.net have been keeping their apt repos current to varying degrees. fedora.us has the initial releases, but freshrpms.net has the rawhide repo. I'm confident that when when Fedora Core 1 is released, both fedora.us and freshrpms.net will have their full apt repositories carreid over, and updates will continue to be released through them.
No you don't. RHEL AS 3.0 has only been available for like 1 month.
I can accept that. You see the distinction that we're still getting the same product, just with a different label, and contributions from more people. Lone_marauder seemed to be saying that the community was going to be cut off from the content itself.
Amen to that. I was getting close to switching to Evolution for palm synching until I reliased it still doesn't have a bayesian filter like moz/thunderbird. The vFolders in evolution are great, but they don't fit the bill for this task for me. I especially like the trash vfolder in Evolution. I find moz/thunderbird a little irritating on this point. If I delete an email and it is moved to the trash folder, it's still in the original folder, just marked for deletion. This behavior extends to filters, so I've had issues with mail checking utilities telling me I have new mail when I don't (unread mail marked for deletion because a filter 'moved' it to a different folder). But the junk filters are worth that hassle.
Almost forgot, where do you think the packages that go into RHEL are coming from? Think of Fedora Core as Debian unstable, and RHEL as Debian stable with commercial support contracts and extra administration tools from a corporation.
Actually I was quite hoping you would, I don't care if the moderators do, I linked it for you.
Of course Fedora will be available in public CVS.
This move has no impact on the availability of RHEL products, only on the availability of free versions of Red Hat, which have become Fedora. You stated the community is having access taken away, I don't see how that is the case, nor do I see how the link I provided fails to reinforce my position. If you want to talk strictly about RHEL for a minute, are you aware that all the SRPMs for GPL packages, and updates to those packages, are available for free download from ftp.redhat.com? That's not changing.
So, I ask what access to the Red Hat line is the community loosing?
I know, I was speaking strictly in terms of which Linux disrtibutions are supported, not comparing Linux to commercial Unix. Other than SUSE, I can think of no other Linux distribution with official support for such marque commercial applications.
We could buy a single set and copy the hell out of it, but thats probably forbidden somewhere (yes/no?)
In a manner of speaking. If you want the support contract, you have to license it for all the machines. If you don't want the support contract, you can install it on every machine you like with reckless abandon. I'm not sure how updates are handled for unregistered installations of RHEL.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that RH follows the GPL more than SUSE, but that no longer sways you? That's whay I think you're saying. You're not saying you no longer support them because of the "adherence to the GPL" as though RH is somehow now less in compliance than before, are you? If so, please explain.
Last I checked, $179 was cheaper than Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP Pro. So for an Enterprise workstation, it seems priced rather competitively to me. $100 was loosing them money in the long run. I read something on the fedora-test-list mailing list about a professional workstation, which I think was going to be a trimmed down RHEL AW that you could get at Best Buy. but nobody, including the RH employees reading the list knew [or was allowed to yet admit they knew] anything about it.
That's just flat-out wrong. Just look here and notice that Michael Johnson, who speaks on behalf of Red Hat, announcing "The next major change will almost certainly be maintaining packages in public CVS". So how exactly is the communicty having access taken away?
actually I've seen far more people comparing MS favorably to Red Hat in terms of how long releases are supported.
sorry, been having sinus problems, "well, WH" => "well, RH"
well, WH was providing backports of security patches to multiple versions of the same packages, and making it all available in free binary downloads. It costs a lot of money (the time to backport so many times and the bandwidth to serve it all). the main effect is the free binary iso images and free binary updates. That will be transitioned from Red Hat to the Fedora community as a whole. Still available, just not necessarily from redhat.com servers. The RHEL stuff will have no change in availability. You can still download all the GPL source and the source to the updates. (They didn't release free binary downloads of RHEL to begin with).
Do you have a moral objection to Debian being maintained by volunteers. Red Hat is transitioning their free distribution to the same model. Red Hat will pay their employees to maintain and package their code. In the meantime, joe volunteer is now able to step up to the plate and maintain official packages for his favorite application which RH doesn't include. For example, RH doesn't offer the linux-wlan-ng software, but someone already maintains RPMs of it built for RH. He now has a framework to have his work included as part of Fedora Core. Sounds like a win for both sides to me.
You would use RHEL over a competing Linux distro mainly for the strong support of other software vendors like Oracle, and IBM (Java, WebSphere Studio, ClearCase). Sure these applications will most likely work on other distros, but the systems are already designed to play nicely with RHEL and vice versa. There's also the backported security patches for 5 years. You won't have to upgrade to a new release of openssh when 5 exploits are released in the span of one week next year, you just get the patches backported to your current version by RedHat, typically in less than 12 hours. And if you have 100 servers, I'd take RHN over apt-get. You just log onto rhn.redhat.com, identify which patches to apply (you can apply them to all affected servers or a subset you define), and the machines all upgrade themselves from one handy administrative interface. I'm not aware of such an interface for any other distro. You can delegate privileges to multiple users too.