×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Red Hat Releases RHEL 6 Public Beta 1

samzenpus posted about 4 years ago | from the how-about-a-test-drive dept.

Red Hat Software 148

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.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

148 comments

Too bad they gave up on XEN (5, Informative)

d3vi1 (710592) | about 4 years ago | (#31936668)

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.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (2, Informative)

Pecisk (688001) | about 4 years ago | (#31936692)

They replaced it with KVM, but it still bears some stigmata in Xen community.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

silentcoder (1241496) | about 4 years ago | (#31936736)

>but it still bears some stigmata in Xen community.
You mean when Xen community members here "KVM" they hit nails through their wrists ?

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936788)

You mean your mother loves the cock? Cuz every sperm is sacred right? Religious zealot fuck bringing up the Crucifixion over a spelling error.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

silentcoder (1241496) | about 4 years ago | (#31936802)

More like atheist making a pun out of the fact that your spelling error has meaning. Well, I thought it was funny.

May I recommend some humoroid supplements ?

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936840)

Did You Know? After maintaining a vow of silence for almost 7 years, Red Hat Linux founder Marc Ewing now freely admits that he named Red Hat Linux after Limp Bizkit frontman Fred Durst's trademark red New York Yankees baseball cap.

Durst and Ewing met in Ewing's hometown of Raleigh, North Carolina (Durst was raised in Gastonia, NC), where they became fast friends, sharing the same passion for low-level system programming. Durst collaborated with Ewing on the first preview beta of Red Hat Linux before the demands of his rocketing stardom forced him to abandon his hobby and tour with his band.

Durst's position on the development team was filled by Damien Neil, and not many know of his contribution to the popular Linux distribution; however, a google search through the source code on Redhat.com (http://www.google.com/search?q=wfd+site:redhat.com) reveals many snippets of code authored by 'wfd', Durst's initials (William Frederick Durst).

Durst asked Ewing to keep his 'geeky' roots a secret as it would not lend itself to Durst's bad boy image, but as Ewing points out, it was "only a matter of time" before the origins of his NASDAQ-100 company's name were uncovered.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937054)

May I recommend some haemorrhoid supplements ?

FTFY

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937310)

>You mean when Xen community members here "KVM" they hit nails through their wrists ?
You mean only the Xen community members that are there do that?

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (2, Interesting)

d3vi1 (710592) | about 4 years ago | (#31936866)

Don't really care about Xen vs. KVM from a product perspective, but for the Opteron 270, Xen is the only one that works since that Opteron doesn't have hardware virtualization instructions. KVM doesn't (to my knowledge) support software based paravirtualization like Xen.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

mukund (163654) | about 4 years ago | (#31937070)

Try VirtualBox. It performs well, even when not using hardware virtualization support.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (2, Interesting)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937174)

While I've been a fan of VirtualBox for a while too, with the Oracle acquisition I wonder if adopting it now isn't just asking to take a ride onto another abandoned VM platform. Oracle already has Oracle VM [wikipedia.org] , which is Xen based. At this point it looks like Oracle is going to turn VirtualBox into a gateway product [virtualization.info] used to hook people used to upsell onto Oracle VM. I'm not sure what that bodes for the future of VirtualBox development. I'm guessing that Oracle shifting development focus toward Oracle product compatibility concerns, so that it's easier to move paying customer to their more serious product, isn't a good sign for people who have been expecting VirtualBox to move further toward being more suitable for larger scale business deployments.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

jernejk (984031) | about 4 years ago | (#31937234)

VirtualBox = desktop Xen=server completely different products, comparing them is nonsense

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937294)

I wasn't the one who suggested VirtualBox as a Xen replacement. If your position is that "VirtualBox = desktop", that's just further evidence that it's probably not appropriate for the FP here to adopt, which is in line with my suggestion to tread carefully in that direction.

While primarily targeting the desktop, VirtualBox was becoming increasingly useful as a server virtualization solution. My main point was that such improvements are less to continue now, because Oracle already has a Xen based solution for servers they're selling.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

dAzED1 (33635) | about 4 years ago | (#31939818)

VirtualBox was becoming increasingly useful as a server virtualization solution.

You must have had a lot of fun on 4/20 - you seem to still be under affects from that day.

VirtualBox is great for a 5 second "does this work for an XP user?" answer. There is no reasonable justification for using it to host a server of any sort of production value.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

mukund (163654) | about 4 years ago | (#31937434)

VirtualBox = desktop Xen=server completely different products, comparing them is nonsense

By this, you either mean:

1. VirtualBox doesn't support 'server' guest operating systems -- This would be incorrect as VirtualBox does support server guest operating systems. In fact, if your guest OS is Linux, it doesn't matter if the distro is a 'server' distro or a 'desktop' distro.. the OS packages are the same, except for their versions and distro-specific patches.

OR

2. VirtualBox doesn't have features typically used by admins who deploy server operating systems -- While this may have been correct years ago, it is not so today [wikipedia.org] . VirtualBox can be controlled from the commandline, has an API if you want to control it from scripts, supports snapshots, live migration, remote desktop, web console, and a range of networking configurations. Maybe you can find some specific feature it doesn't have when compared to another product, but this is like comparing Oracle and PostgreSQL. If 90% of admins are happy with the features that VirtualBox provides, that's good enough for that 90%.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

diegocg (1680514) | about 4 years ago | (#31937328)

You also must notice that Virtualbox has a couple of proprietary features that are only available if you pay them: Support for USB and RDP. This is the typical Sun open source business model, open source it but require copyright assignment to all external code contributions, so that Sun can release an alternative version with propietary addons (which even the external contributors have to pay for)

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937552)

You also must notice that Virtualbox has a couple of proprietary features that are only available if you pay them: Support for USB and RDP. This is the typical Sun open source business model, open source it but require copyright assignment to all external code contributions, so that Sun can release an alternative version with propietary addons (which even the external contributors have to pay for)

Not to interrupt your kicking of a dead horse, but according to Wikipedia Innotek adopted this business model before Sun bought Virtualbox. It was previously an entirely proprietary product.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 4 years ago | (#31937784)

RDP I can understand, but please tell me the usage of USB passthrough in a datacenter environment? (that can't be easily done through the host by other means (such as shared directories))

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 4 years ago | (#31938198)

Or you could go with VMWare, which also works with paravirtualised guests, and has pretty good support.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

h00manist (800926) | about 4 years ago | (#31937292)

It's a good example of a glaring barrier for open source growth: programmer man-hours, and corporations filling in those man-hours and buying the product, basically for the technical features already reached and marketing effect, with no commitment whatsoever with open source. Then nobody can quite fork the product and continue maintaining it open, simply out of a man-hours shortage. More options to get people working on open-source projects, keeping them open, are needed. I sort of lean toward feature pledges, with qualified project-manager reviewers, programmers in developing countries will likely start jumping at these.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

Minwee (522556) | about 4 years ago | (#31938750)

but it still bears some stigmata in Xen community.

Do you mean that your virtualization hosts are bleeding for no explained reason, or are you trying to say that RedHat carries a social stigma because of their acquisition of Qumranet and support for their KVM platform?

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

jernejk (984031) | about 4 years ago | (#31936694)

Wow, that sucks. I wonder if they did it to screw Oracle (Oracle vm server uses xen and Oracle enterprise linux, which is more or less rebranded RHEL). This will be interesting.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (2, Informative)

shinzawai (964083) | about 4 years ago | (#31936720)

This was announced about a year ago...old news. They were always going to give up on Xen when they purchased Qumranet...makers of KVM and the SPICE protocol.

Why the KVM vs XEN dispute? (1)

h00manist (800926) | about 4 years ago | (#31937374)

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.

Re:Why the KVM vs XEN dispute? (3, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937606)

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 [ibm.com] , Linux: KVM Paravirtualization [kerneltrap.org] , and The truth about KVM and Xen [codemonkey.ws] .

Re:Why the KVM vs XEN dispute? (2, Informative)

1s44c (552956) | about 4 years ago | (#31937716)

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.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936782)

No, it's for technology reasons that apparently you are unable to understand.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (2, Funny)

slashmojo (818930) | about 4 years ago | (#31936774)

I use xen extensively too so its a good job EL5 will still be supported for many more years (until 2014 they say but all bets are off after 2012 ;) ).

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

zerocool^ (112121) | about 4 years ago | (#31939414)

This is modded as funny, but if you see their Life Cycle page at:
https://www.redhat.com/security/updates/errata/ [redhat.com]

You can see that there's a 3 phase cycle for release support. Major versions are supported for 7 years, with the first 4 years being "primary support", i.e. new features, hardware support, and bug / security patches, and then after that they move into a maintenance cycle in which they will first not push new features, and finally only push bug fixes / security patches that are marked as "critical".

This is important to those of us that manage thousands of RHEL boxes.

Btw, got my RHCE a couple of months ago! So, technically, for me, the longer RHEL6 takes to come out, the better - my RHCE is valid until RHEL7.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

Rhys (96510) | about 4 years ago | (#31938372)

Too bad except the Xen they shipped in RHEL5 has been nothing but a headache for me. VMs set to auto-start don't. Sometimes. Rarely they hang on the way down and have to be killed. Trying to put a different version of RHEL or Fedora on often results in failure (conflicting paravirt support from the kvm switch = no dice).

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31938384)

Please provide citation for this. I'm doing research now for the move, in theory this fall/winter testing will start, and nothing I've found says it won't work on our current hardware. That being said nothing says it will either.

Re:Too bad they gave up on XEN (1)

d3vi1 (710592) | about 4 years ago | (#31938778)

http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page [linux-kvm.org] - It says clearly that it uses "x86 hardware containing virtualization extensions (Intel VT or AMD V)".
See also: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Status [linux-kvm.org]
On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization [wikipedia.org] it says that the AMD V instructions came up in the second generation Opteron processors (the ones with Socket F).
Furthermore, from the same Wikipedia: "All Socket 939 and only Sempron processors except Sable, Huron and Sargas do not include support for AMD-V".

If you don't believe me, do a 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' and tell me if you see any virtualization instructions over there.

Showing its age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936698)

At last. The RHEL5 workstations at my Uni are almost unusable these days do to everything being so old and buggy. 3 years is a MASSIVE amount of time in terms of software improvements. Pity we don't have CentOS or Fedora, although we "can't do that' apparently because of the support contract that we NEVER use.

Re:Showing its age (3, Insightful)

6031769 (829845) | about 4 years ago | (#31936734)

Hmmm. Would you care to explain what you think it is that CentOS would give you that RHEL doesn't?

Re:Showing its age (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936756)

better pricing

Re:Showing its age (2, Insightful)

backwardMechanic (959818) | about 4 years ago | (#31936998)

True. But Redhat put a lot of work into Linux, and I'm happy for my company to help fund those coders, so I buy RHEL licences.

Re:Showing its age (1)

EzInKy (115248) | about 4 years ago | (#31937564)


True. But Redhat put a lot of work into Linux, and I'm happy for my company to help fund those coders, so I buy RHEL licences.

Couldn't agree more. I use to run out and plunk down $ every time a new release came out whether I was running RH as my distro or not until they quit selling personal editions.

Re:Showing its age (1, Interesting)

shovas (1605685) | about 4 years ago | (#31937614)

I half-heartedly agree with you but Red Hat is a razor's edge away from violating the spirit of the of GPL if not the law.

I know the GPL, I realize all they really need to do is provide the source in some form and that SRPMS are actually a step above just pure source but there's something about it that leaves lingering doubt as to their ongoing commitment to maintaining even those so that distros like CentOS are even possible.

What's more, everybody talks about Red Hat putting money into their distro, what about all the real developers of the packages they re-package for their distribution? That money that you pay Red Hat? It never gets to the guys who actually developed the software. So, Red hat isn't completely innocent here. They're living for free off money, time and effort spent by those developers - just as much as CentOS users are living for free off the money, time and effort put in by Red Hat.

I'm okay with the strategy Red Hat is employing but the goodwill they earned in the past has certainly ebbed away over time. Open source is open source. Continue to be a trustworthy community partner and we won't have any problems.

Re:Showing its age (4, Informative)

backwardMechanic (959818) | about 4 years ago | (#31937792)

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.

Re:Showing its age (4, Informative)

nicolas.kassis (875270) | about 4 years ago | (#31937852)

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.

Re:Showing its age (1)

backwardMechanic (959818) | about 4 years ago | (#31939426)

Um, did you read the thread? Or even that particular comment? Sheesh, I know it's not cool to read the article, but I thought maybe you'd read the message you're replying to.

Re:Showing its age (1)

shovas (1605685) | about 4 years ago | (#31937890)

It's all about balance. The current balance is acceptable. Red Hat just needs to prove long term they won't be trying to stretch the GPL very much further.

Re:Showing its age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31938360)

It's all about balance. The current balance is acceptable. Red Hat just needs to prove long term they won't be trying to stretch the GPL very much further.

They don't have to "prove" anything. They're complying with GPL, and they have corporate counsel along with the ability to out-money anybody who thinks they aren't.

Your socialist slip is showing; might want to adjust that skirt little girl.

Re:Showing its age (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 4 years ago | (#31937740)

True. But Redhat put a lot of work into Linux, and I'm happy for my company to help fund those coders, so I buy RHEL licences.

I don't but Linux licenses, the company I work for does.

Re:Showing its age (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 4 years ago | (#31939796)

True. But Redhat put a lot of work into Linux, and I'm happy for my company to help fund those coders, so I buy RHEL licences.

Well...if you don't actually need the support and are only purchasing it as a way to support RedHat, wouldn't it make more sense to just make a donation to them and continue using your distro of choice?

Re:Showing its age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937354)

If you don't care about support, then certainly it would be stupid to buy red hat. But in my experience, i'd rather pay for support.

Re:Showing its age (1)

IBBoard (1128019) | about 4 years ago | (#31936944)

Those hugely important features like "more colours in your OS icon" and "a name that doesn't include 'Enterprise' so directly" (yes, I realise CentOS is still based off "enterprise", but RHEL is short-hand for a full name where as CentOS is its name).

Re:Showing its age (1)

dustwun (662589) | about 4 years ago | (#31937188)

Why do you think it doesn't have enterprise in the name? It's the Community ENTerprise OS.
Like RHEL, it's often shortened.

Re:Showing its age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937020)

Would you care to explain what you think it is that CentOS would give you that RHEL doesn't?

The ability to reposync without being forced to pay for satellite.

Re:Showing its age (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937360)

that's the biggy for us at work. the fact that we can host our own CentOS mirrors easily and simply blows RedHat away. the redhat network is extremely slow, and we've found it unreliable/unavailable in the past, which has left us in some _really_ bad situations!

Re:Showing its age (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 4 years ago | (#31938194)

Hmmm. Would you care to explain what you think it is that CentOS would give you that RHEL doesn't?

Free access to their repositories..including updates?

Re:Showing its age (2, Interesting)

gilboad (986599) | about 4 years ago | (#31938690)

(I use CentOS on development machines, RHEL for production)

1. Releases: Please compare the release date of say, RHEL 4.8 (19/5/09) to CentOS 4.8 (21/8/09).
Or better yet, compare RHEL 5.5 (30/3/10) to CentOS 5.5 (will be ready when its ready).
Now, CentOS devs tend to follow RedHat security updates fairly closely, and I usually see the CentOS updates ~12-48h after their RHEL parents.
However: A. In production environment, I rather not wait 12-48h. B. Given the complexity of major updates (E.g. RHEL 5.5), CentOS tends to lag RedHat by a considerable margin.

2. Support: We once had a RHEL kernel fix, specifically tailored to our issue, within 24h. CentOS devs simply cannot compete with RedHat. Period.

Make no mistakes, I bow before the CentOS devs for maintaining a great distribution, but when my job is on the line, I rather put RHEL. Period.
Nobody gets fired for using RHEL.

- Gilboa

Re:Showing its age (1)

gilboad (986599) | about 4 years ago | (#31938776)

.. Argh.
The OP message was hidden, so I missed the reason for your answer.
(OP: RHEL is old and buggy, wish we could use CentOS or Fedora; You: CentOS -is- RHEL...)

My mistake.

- Gilboa

Re:Showing its age (1)

zigmeister (1281432) | about 4 years ago | (#31937052)

Meh, we have RHEL5 at my uni in the cs labs and I don't really mind them at all. I mean, all I do in there is write c in emacs and debug it. We even get a web browser, MS Word, Open Office, Matlab and a couple others. What bugs are plaguing you, OTOH what features do you want that you need for lab work are missing?

Disclaimer: I don't do any graphics work, they have some pretty sweet 3D monitors on XP stations in the lab next door for those guys tho.

Re:Showing its age (2, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 4 years ago | (#31940456)

I don't use RHEL, but I occasionally get complaints from people who do because it ships with a really ancient glibc that is missing features that I use in my code (you know, really new stuff from the 1999 version of the POSIX spec). For Linux-specific features, I don't believe that the glibc included with RHEL includes timerfd() support, which means that implementing an efficient event-driven application is difficult (you have to mess around with timeouts on epoll() and keep track of them yourself, rather than just adding a timer event source to your file descriptors).

The included version of GCC is pretty old too, so it doesn't support some of the newer extensions. The most obvious of these is atomic ops. I have to fall back to using some inline asm if I want to support RHEL which means, if I can be bothered, it's only on a couple of architectures that I have access to for testing.

Re:Showing its age (1)

cream wobbly (1102689) | about 4 years ago | (#31940844)

3 years is a massive span of time. So it's a good job Red Hat backports patches.

Don't blame your crappy sysadmins problems on Red Hat.

We use RHEL4 alongside RHEL5 at my place of work, and it's not buggy. Yup, on the desktop.

You know what? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936732)

I took the plunge and installed Linux today. Top Hat or some hat version. But now I have a problem. Im getting these big red lesions all over me. Im not allergic to anything that would cause that, and I havent become infected with any diseases, my doctor checked me out fine. Then I figured out what Linux really is. Open Sores. Linux is killing me! Help!

adsacrossindia (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936766)

www.adsacrossindia.com

Direct download links (3, Informative)

fearlezz (594718) | about 4 years ago | (#31936776)

ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/rhel/beta/6/ [redhat.com]

Or torrent it:
http://www.torrentreactor.net/torrents/5568298/RHEL-6-Beta-64-Bit [torrentreactor.net]
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

centos tracker! WAS Re:Direct download links (2, Interesting)

nfsilkey (652484) | about 4 years ago | (#31937262)

Erm, why not try a more legit-smelling tracker? ;)

The CentOS project is serving the beta ISOs from their tracker, but Ill be damned if I can find the .torrent files served via CentOS. $random_blog_guy is serving some which link you up to the CentOS tracker.

http://www.karan.org/stuff/rhel6-i386-beta-dvd.torrent [karan.org]
http://www.karan.org/stuff/rhel6-ppc64-beta-dvd.torrent [karan.org]
http://www.karan.org/stuff/rhel6-x86_64-beta-dvd.torrent [karan.org]
http://torrent.centos.org:6969/ [centos.org]

Sums check out. Waaaay faster than the smoldering ftp.redhat heap that were all machine-gunning. ;)

Re:centos tracker! WAS Re:Direct download links (2, Informative)

blitzkrieg3 (995849) | about 4 years ago | (#31937326)

I don't know, ibiblio [ibiblio.org] is kind of legit. Red Hat didn't feel like releasing a torrent, since they don't have a tracker lying around.

Re:centos tracker! WAS Re:Direct download links (1)

fearlezz (594718) | about 4 years ago | (#31937594)

I could have supplied those links. But as this link was on top of the google results, I thought it was best for performance to let everybody join that tracker. I'm now trying to seed both.

creators; updated planet/population rescue kode (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31936918)

just like any crowd pleaser, the 'gnu' release has more lights, colors & sounds. not ones to be outdone/upstaged/ignored the creators have added exclusive tactile (we know some of you can feel it) features to the latest release of their wwwildly popular, newclear powered, user friendly, bug free planet/population rescue initiative/mandate kode.

as always, never a better time to consult with/trust in your creators, who just keep perfecting things since/until forever. see you there?

which fedora? (3, Funny)

Kludge (13653) | about 4 years ago | (#31937140)

On which fedora is this based?

Re:which fedora? (4, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937238)

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 [kernelnewbies.org] .

Re:which fedora? (2, Informative)

Macka (9388) | about 4 years ago | (#31937312)

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.

Re:which fedora? (2, Interesting)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937338)

It's not even quite that simple unfortunately. I highlighted the kernel example because FC12 is based on 2.6.31, RHEL6 on 2.6.32, and FC13 on 2.6.33. So in that particular case, they're picking a version that doesn't match any Fedora release.

Re:which fedora? (2, Interesting)

mowall (865642) | about 4 years ago | (#31937602)

It's not even quite that simple unfortunately. I highlighted the kernel example because FC12 is based on 2.6.31, RHEL6 on 2.6.32, and FC13 on 2.6.33. So in that particular case, they're picking a version that doesn't match any Fedora release.

FC12 was released with 2.6.31 but is now running 2.6.32, so I guess RHEL6 is closest to FC12.

Re:which fedora? (1)

blitzkrieg3 (995849) | about 4 years ago | (#31938210)

It's a very fast moving tree. For example, I'm running 2.6.32 on F12 right now even though it shipped with .31. The .32 kernel just happens to be the release that balances the need for test enough with the latest release out of kernel.org.

Re:which fedora? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31940204)

also, 2.6.32 is a long term support kernel. ie 2-3 years instead of 6 months.

Re:which fedora? (1)

Luke has no name (1423139) | about 4 years ago | (#31940726)

IIRC 2.6.32 is considered an "LTS" kernel. Occasionally, kernels are "suggested" to be used for longer support cycle releases for distros. Ubuntu 10.04 is using .32 as well.

Re:which fedora? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31937260)

www.girlscompany.co.uk

London Escort Agency

As a respected and established London escort agency we provide companionship for all possible situations. From evening dates, travel or business companions to outright mind-blowing intimacy. We take pride in the service we provide and see to it that we match every customer with the best escort girl regarding his or hers requirement. Our escort agency works with only the best escort girls London houses. Our standards are above and beyond any other escort agency and customer satisfaction is the highest in the business.

Escort services

Our customers expect the best escort service and they have never been disappointed. Known for providing the best escort service in London our escort agency has a wide variety of escort girls to choose from. You name it we got it and .. you can get it ..

Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (3, Insightful)

h00manist (800926) | about 4 years ago | (#31937420)

It would be quite wonderful if someone could figure out a way to make packages installable easily on all linux distros, or at least create a few "compatibility profiles". This whole repository ubuntu-vs-debian-vs-redhat-vs-mandriva-vs-older-versions-of-same is a nightmare for newbie users.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 4 years ago | (#31937752)

It would be quite wonderful if someone could figure out a way to make packages installable easily on all linux distros, or at least create a few "compatibility profiles". This whole repository ubuntu-vs-debian-vs-redhat-vs-mandriva-vs-older-versions-of-same is a nightmare for newbie users.

This has existed for a long time. It's called 'linux standard base' or LSB.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

kc8apf (89233) | about 4 years ago | (#31940060)

Which only covers the filesystem layout and basic services. It says nothing about APIs or versions of libraries.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31940334)

Personally I think Shuttleworth has a better solution with his calls for cadence. What is the point in having a common packaging standard if each distro is going to test and design around different versions anyway?

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 years ago | (#31937780)

It would be quite wonderful if someone could figure out a way to make packages installable easily on all linux distros,

It's called building all the libraries and bundling them all together. Include them all in the package, and then using a script, craft an LD_LIBRARY_PATH that places this library location at the end of the path, using the OS' libraries if they are present. You need only link to the proper versions of libraries to make this work (that is, most projects just link against the major version; link against the minor as well. That avoids a lot of incompatibility problems, at the expense of being more likely to drive the user to your version of the driver. Or in other words, do what they do in OSX. Although they don't do it precisely this way, laying down a big directory full of libraries is their answer to this problem.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

kc8apf (89233) | about 4 years ago | (#31940108)

Uh, no. OS X provides a rich set of libraries as part of the base OS. Apple goes to great lengths to ensure compatibility between OS versions (libSystem is compatible to version 1). The only time any software includes a library inside their app bundle is if they wrote it or it is an OSS library that isn't in the base OS. Most apps don't need to.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 4 years ago | (#31940232)

Nothing in your comment contradicted anything in my comment. Try again.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (4, Insightful)

greg1104 (461138) | about 4 years ago | (#31937838)

Why do newbie users even need to care about that? If you pick a distribution that has a good set of packages, they should rarely have to leave the ones provided with it. Run whatever front-end for package management you've got, make sure all the optional repositories are enabled, and there should be so many packages there the hard part is sorting through them all--not finding even more. Particularly given that so many things that used to be run as local apps have moved onto web applications nowadays, the main headaches for Linux newbies I see is getting their hardware working and making Flash work.

They don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31939920)

In Linux, you don't download software installers from third parties like in the Windows world. If you're trying to do it that way, you're doing it wrong. The correct way to install software in Linux is to use the provided software repository and provided package management tools. Yes, package management differs according to distribution, but that's completely irrelevant to the end user. If they're using the provided tools, they don't even have to know what a deb or rpm file is.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 4 years ago | (#31938086)

That would be nice, and it's entirely capable of being done... but it's a nightmare of work all put on the package maintainer's shoulders. So, it usually doesn't happen.

Re:Too many Linux-incompatible-with-Linux distros (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31940994)

Easy, stick with Debian.

But seriously, I've only heard one argument for RH over Debian besides its enterprise support; that being that Debian's use of /etc/network/interfaces is archaic @_@

Current PHP? (1)

SlamMan (221834) | about 4 years ago | (#31938046)

Please, for the love of god, tell me they're finaly including PHP 5.2 in RHEL.

Re:Current PHP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31938282)

It's even more amusing than that. They're including PHP 5.3.

5.3.1 + pecl mcd and apc! Re:Current PHP? (1)

nfsilkey (652484) | about 4 years ago | (#31940244)

fuzz:Packages silkey$ pwd /Volumes/RHEL_6.0 i386 Di/Packages

fuzz:Packages silkey$ ls -1 php*
php-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-cli-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-common-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-gd-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-ldap-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-mcrypt-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-mysql-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-odbc-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-pdo-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-pear-1.9.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
php-pecl-apc-3.1.3p1-1.1.el6.i686.rpm
php-pecl-memcache-3.0.4-3.1.el6.i686.rpm
php-pgsql-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-soap-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-xml-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm
php-xmlrpc-5.3.1-7.el6.i686.rpm

Why (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31939074)

I never tried RedHat, but I can't understand what more it can offer than a free distro? Seems the same to me, would be stupid to pay for this.

Re:Why (1)

jpmoney (323533) | about 4 years ago | (#31939530)

Support in an enterprise environment. Enterprise/Professional level software vendors need a base to offer support on and Redhat was the first to be viable in that market. SUSE is kinda there, but Redhat is pretty much the standard when it comes to Linux running high end software packages for businesses.*

*Aside from Z-series/mainframes, but thats a whole other league.

Re:Why (1)

Daengbo (523424) | about 4 years ago | (#31939998)

Ummmm. People who can hack the kernel or virtually any other package to fix your problem? Or do you have a staff of 20 elite Linux coders on staff?

Dropping OSS support? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#31940686)

http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6-Beta/html/Beta_Release_Notes/apcs02.html

C.2. Discontinued Drivers
Listed below are device drivers have been discontinued in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Beta.

        *
            aic7xxx_old (replaced by aic7xxx)
        *
            atp870u
        *
            cpqarray
        *
            DAC960
        *
            dc395x
        *
            gdth
        *
            hfs
        *
            hfsplus
        *
            linuxwacom (replaced by xorg-x11-drv-wacom)
        *
            megaraid (replaced by megaraid_mbox)
        *
            net/tokenring/
        *
            paride
        *
            qla1280
        *
            sound/core/oss
        *
            sound/drivers/opl3/*
        *
            sound/pci/nm256

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...