Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Red Hat Software Businesses

Red Hat 6.0 and Arm? 117

Posted by CmdrTaco from the unconfirmed-rumors dept.
Bert de Bruijn writes "As Red Hat prepares all RawHide packages for RedHat 6.0 (codename "BlueSky"), support is being added for the ARM architecture. Obviously, Red Hat Software plans to release the next version of their distribution for the ARM architecture (Corel Netwinder & co.)" I dunno if this is proof but it looks hopeful.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Red Hat 6.0 and Arm? More

Red Hat 6.0 and Arm?

Comments Filter:
  • Posted by stodge:

    I do love the KDE integration and the look of the windows, but KDE is an absolute resource hog. I hate the look of the icons though :P At the moment I use Afterstep (looks great!), but for the future? I'd like to try gnome if I can get all my libs to the current versions (damn you RPM!).
  • What Red Hat release is going to have the 2.2.0 kernel & (approximately) when will it be?


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • Cool...thanx


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • It wasn't on my cheap bytes CD even though AfterStep, fvwm2, and Gnome all were. Stupid, too, because KDE is one of the more popular "window managers".


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • I like KDE, but I'm not sure I'd refer to it as sleek...KDE is a bit of a resource hog compared with fvwm2...as you pointed out, tho, fvwm95 is the crappiest interface ever...worse, even, than Windoze

    I agree, too, that they ought to include pqmagic...would be nice if they could also integrate it into the install process...neither fips nore the much touted disk druid are any good compared with pqmagic.


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • :)


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • I'm running a Presario 4814 (stock) which means I have 32 meg of ram and a 233 MHz MMX processor. I reduced the load by killing off some of the networking processes and by removing my kde backgrounds, but it still eats a chunk. And when I run VNC on my friend's computer, kde takes a noticeable chunk out of that one too. And that one is a dual-processor 200 MHz system running with a whopping lot of ram. Maybe KDE just likes your system :)


    # find /dev/brain
    find: cannot open /dev/brain: No such file or directory
  • Oddly enough, I never had any problems with ipfwadm and the 5.x Redhats. Although Xconfigurator has had it's problems.


    If the user has to download any updates, or go running to the newsgroups (lack of rtfm excepted) then it is indeed broken despite being your pet distro.
  • Do you really think the typical Windows crowd can actually take the culture shock of being dumped into a WindowManager that makes no attempts to immitate the look of Windows whatsoever?
  • A 2.2 kernel does not a major distro release make.

    Oh, but doesn't it? If you think about it, all of the tools and system utilities released with RH5.x were designed to work with the 2.0.x kernel. A great many of those are going to need to be upgraded/replaced to work with 2.2 (ipfwadm -> ipchains, for example, along with whatever GUI front-end they use, if any). As a result, I would expect version numbers of RPM's included in 6.0 to differ a lot more from 5.2 than 5.2 did from 5.1.

    I do hope that RH takes it a bit further, though, and doesn't just upgrade the programs that need to be upgraded to work with 2.2. It should "feel" like a new major version.
  • I thought he was right-on. He did say "At least not in the US", and he was correct. SuSE is mainly a European popularity, which I think he adequately addressed.

    Don't be so quick to jump down somebody's throat and start calling them names. Re-read their post to see if maybe you missed or misunderstood something.

    To continue on with what he was saying, RedHat is the most popular distribution, which is why you tend to more hear things (both good and bad) about RedHat than you do about lesser-known distributions such as SuSE. That's the point he was trying to make.

    And take a pill..

  • Ironic (Score:1)

    by jd ( 1658 )
    That Linux distributers are increasingly producing ARM ports, when Acorn Computers (one of the best manufacturers of ARM-based computers) deleted (not even sold) their computer division, sacked a hundred or so workers and renamed themselves.

    I propose we slashdot the website of the company formerly known as Acorn, and tell them what we think of their disgraceful behaviour towards their computer division.

  • WindowMaker and AfterStep are provided in 5.2. Either is easy to specify as the default window manager. For wmaker, there are a few themes and styles provided and the initial popup menus refer to most RH admin utilities.
  • I remember reading something from Corel saying that the Netwinder was gonna use RH Linux. Which makes this make a lot of sense.

    --

  • Since where on the topic of Redhat 6.0, has anyone heard if they are going to improve the RPM's? I left the redhat camp due to how difficult it could be to update/upgrade the system.

    It would really be to thier advantage to get something similar to dselect that will update/upgrade a package & all it's dependencies in one step.

  • So a single comment deep in the pages of RedHat say that ARM support is going to be included with RedHat 6? That's a huge stretch! What about a link to a site on RedHat's site saying that they plan to support it. It just seems like a huge assumption that because one person put a comment on a page that the entire organization is set to support it!
  • Subject speaks for itself.

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Kind of. You'll still need to upgrade a number of utilities. Noticeably absent is glibc 2.1, which is understandable: I installed it (2.0.95) by hand last week (by rolling my own rpm) and had lots of problems with it, so I reinstalled glibc 2.0.7. There are probably some newer 2.1 versions I'll have to try when I get the time.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • It also defeats the purpose of login security. For instance, when you try to login on the console as a user who does not exist it still asks for a password and will tell you "Login incorrect", the same as if the user did exist but the password was wrong. This is just a means of keeping such information on a need-to-know basis. Providing names and pictures of users kind of defeats that purpose.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Just because fvwm95 sucks doesn't mean that fvwm2 itself sucks. All it needs is GNOME-compliance and it's still the best (IMHO) [hell, even without GNOME-compliance it's the best :-) ].
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • I love fvwm2! Don't base your experiences on fvwm95/AnotherLevel. Hell, you can even find themes for fvwm2. In terms of functionality what is it really missing? The ability to put side buttons on your window borders? I mean, in terms of necessary functionality it's all there, and it's highly configurable as well (in fact, next to E it's one of the most configurable wm's). It's also been there longer, and is more stable and robust than E (haven't used WM so can't speak for it).

    If you're interested in fvwm2 themes, check out fvwm.themes.org. They don't have very much there, but it's a nice proof of concept.

    What I'd like to know is, do either GNOME, or KDE define hints to set a mini-icon image, just as ICCM has hints for full-size icon images (e.g. Netscape uses this). That's one of the few things I'd like to see in fvwm2, if such a standard existed (that and full GNOME-compliance).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • As long as it's linked dynamically, they could ship KDE sans Qt and make you have to go get Qt yourself (or a variant such as Harmony).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • There are still issues involved with mixing Qt and GPL/LGPL software, even when the new Qt license takes effect.

    I'm sure there is some politics mixed in with Red Hat's reasoning. Even if they shipped Qt, I could understand them not wanting to install it by default if only because you still can't develop commercial software using Qt (even with the new license) without paying royalties to Troll Tech. Note that even Motif does not have this restriction on it (AFAIK, and I might be wrong about that).

    In the meantime (before the license change), Red Hat probably can't even ship the Qt libraries without paying royalties to Troll Tech. So they decided to go with GNOME and I'd be disapointed to see them waffle back and forth between KDE and GNOME and end up supporting both in a half-assed manner, even if all the sudden Qt became LGPL'd.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Note all my comments were about Qt, and not KDE, per se. I understand KDE is itself covered by the GPL, so there would not be any issues in including KDE (as long as any potential issues between KDE and Qt are resolved).

    If I was incorrect about the royalties thing, I apologize.

    As for Motif, I don't believe there is a mandated royalty for developing an app with Motif; I think that is left to the implementation of the Motif libraries (of course, I could be wrong about that too, but one could easily link to LessTif libraries instead). However, to get the SI of Motif you have to pay and you have to pay for any copies of your Motif implementation which rely on the SI, which is why Red Hat's Motif (and CDE...ugh) is so damned expensive.



    Further, I do not want to start a KDE/Qt flame war, I'm only trying to grasp and convey the rationale of Red Hat and other distros such as Debian in not going with KDE/Qt (at least, not in their mainstream distributions).

    There are a grand total of 5 apps out of 50 in KDE main packages that use GPL code from other authors.


    I'm not sure what your point here is.

    If it is that GPL and Qt can coexist peacefully, it doesn't prove it, it only proves that someone seems to think so. Until a definative ruling is made (for instance, in court) or at least an announcement by the FSF or SPI on the matter, the question remains unanswered.

    If it is that KDE and GPL applications are compatible, then I agree and wouldn't have asserted otherwise, since KDE is, itself, under the GPL.

    If it is that KDE apps are compatible with the GPL, then this is dependant on the license covering the given apps. If they are using code from GPL'd source code, they have to be GPL'd themselves or they are violating the GPL. I assume that you know this as well as I.

    In short, using GPL'd code in one's KDE application does not show that the current Qt license or the forthcoming QPL are compatible with the GPL.



    As for #2, I'll clarify that there is a problem (or rather, a potential problem) with the current draft of the QPL. The longer it takes for Troll Tech to come up with a workable version of the QPL, the less it matters what is in it at all. As you say, there may be a problem there may not be, but I can't find fault in Red Hat for remaining cautious about the whole situation when their next release will be sometime in the Spring; they can't make decisions based on a license which doesn't exist yet and a piece of software which may or may not use code covered by that license when it does appear. I'm not saying that Red Hat would be doing the right thing by not shipping Qt and/or KDE, but I think there is justification for their decision (and the similar decision of Debian). IMO, if there turns out to not be serious licensing issues or implications then by all means they ought to ship it. I won't use it, but that's no reason not to ship it at all. Of course if they don't, I won't lose any sleep over it.

    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • fvwm95 is a piece of trash, and the fact that it refers to itself as fvwm* hurts its predecessors.

    Well, believe it or not, fvwm95 really is fvwm2, it's just a configuration that makes it look like a crappy rip off of windows. Actually, the name was changed to AnotherLevel, I don't know why, but most of the config stuff still refers to it as fvwm95 (I do believe that fvwm95 was once a derivative work from fvwm2, but now I use the term to refer to the AnotherLevel configuration). Nonetheless, it was ill-thought up and ugly. And it is obviously giving fvwm2 a bad name just by looking at all the posts against fvwm in these replies.

    I've never used fvwm2 with KDE (and hopefully never will ;-), but it works find with GNOME, if you don't mind missing some of the features of GNOME-compliant window managers like root window drag and drop and such (BTW the fvwm2 pager is more functional than the GNOME-pager and it can be swallowed into the panel, so there's no big loss there).
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.

  • Debian - not compliant with their DSFG
    RedHat - harmful to Gnome, thus boycotted, i.e. economical reasons.

    Your mistake is that KDE was around before GNOME. So that begs the question of why Red Hat chose GNOME over KDE? Furthermore, what economic benefits does Red Hat get from not shipping KDE? (BTW, apparently they did in fact ship it with 5.2 in a seperate directory.) Since GNOME is under the GPL and LGPL, it's not like they're losing money either way. In fact, if they dumped GNOME support altogether they wouldn't have to pay the several RHAD developers who work on GNOME, so they would actually save money.

    The point is apparently that they could've taken out those packages and distribute it anyway. But they didn't want to, see above.

    My point is that the fact that any of the KDE apps use GPL'd code from other apps is irrelevant, since they themselves are GPL'd. The issue is (and always has been) with Qt, not necessarily with KDE. Since KDE's core uses Qt, any Qt license issues, real or imagined, affect all of KDE itself, not just those parts that use code from other applications.


    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • You're correct, but in fact the GPL taliban uses the HURD kernel, which I doubt Qt or KDE has been ported to yet, so that issue is irrelevant.

    As for Red Hat, they certainly ship non-GPL'd apps with their distro...Netscape and the Real Audio server come to mind. The difference is that those are apps and not libraries, and Qt being an integral part of KDE, shipping KDE as the default standard means your distribution depends (in some extent) on a non-open library (Qt). Even after the QPL is applied, the current draft does not allow for free commercial development using Qt, and thus may not be fully compatible with GPL/LGPL.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • The problem will be caught at the linker, where one compiler requires symbols that the other doesn't export.

    I think you can still run your old C++ programs as long as you have both libstdc++ & libg++ installed.

    Commercial apps take the most paranoid route and link C++ libs in statically.
  • I'm surprised. I would have thought Redhat would
    wait for Linux 2.2 before heading to version six.
  • SuSE looked real nice, but has some bugs that have made things difficult for me to switch completely from Windows. SuSE does seem easier and has more bundled applications than RH 5.0. Troll Repellent: Just my _opinion_...

    Since I/SuSE haven't yet got PPP to work, and X Windows is unreliable (it only works until I reboot), I'm going to give RH 5.2 a shot tonight.
    ...
    To expand on the SUSE bugs, YaST will hang the system if you are installing to a hard drive which has extra space not assigned to any partition... something that is not hard to do if you want a DOS partition also.

    The other SuSE problem was X appears to work fine, but once I reboot out into Windows and then back X will fail to load (some connection error). Since this is my only working system I might as well give it a shot with RH 5.2 and download the extras later..

    But I would give SuSE 6.0 another shot. Aside from the install bug, which I got around, it seems from my newbie position to be a VERY GOOD distribution, esp. for a home user (even includes the old computer/console emulators). RH is a bit more conservative, but if 5.2 gives me less throuble then it is what I will use, for now...
  • That's very exculsionary opinion, don't you think? Remember most people consider the windows manager to BE the OS!

    I personally (MHO!!) think it is a noble goal for Unix to replace Windows entirely. It can be all things for all people, with the right installers and config tools. For example a server does not need (nor should it have) a window manager, at all.

    Someday we'll all look back at the fall of Microsoft and chuckle at how the world came so close to being truly "dominated".

  • Corel announced a while back that RedHat was going to be doing the dist for the netwinder.
  • Have you been hibernating all winter? :-)

    QT 2.0 will be Open Source compatible.
  • They are after next major release once again?
    To early I suppose. They ought to release
    5.3 first. 5.2 is by no means as stable as
    4.2 was. What we need is a good stable system
    which shouldn't be upgraded more than once
    a two years. Redhat 4.2 was such a system.
    As time come I'll probably install Debian 2.1.

    Hope that RedHat would wait for Postges 6.5 and
    kernel 2.2.1 before shipping their 6.0
  • Unfortunately it is neccessary first to improve
    brains of people who wrote spec files. Same
    for Debian.

    Potentially dependency system in both RPM and
    dpkg is flexible enough, but no one uses it properly.

    Browse dependency lists on www.debian.org and
    you'll see VERY strange dependencies.
  • I think that fvwm is one of the most flexible window managers in the world. I've not tried KDE and GNOME, becouse I have better use for my only 64Mb of memory and only 120millions CPU clocks per second with three X terminals hanging on.

    I agree, that fvwm, as shipped with RedHat is hell to configure. AnotherLevel is evil. fvwm, as it comes out of the box is a bit better. At least all configuration is in one file and you can edit it as you wish.

    But nothing prevents you from writing your own modules - you need not even know C, you can do it on Tcl and invent your own configuration mechanism. Too bad that all newcomers, which have good ideas about interface, think that if they want something new, they have to throw whole thing away and write new one from scratch.

    Even worse, they think that C++ is only language, while such things as desktop goodies should be written on Tcl or Python to let anyone customize them.

    This reminds me that a lot of people come up with screams "xdm is evil" and new login managers, which are nice, but don't support most basic feature of xdm - XDCMP protocol.

    Let the thing do what it does well (in case of fvwm - drag window around and assign actions to buttons), and wrote small things that do well something, which old thing does wrong. But don't ever attempt to sacrifice functionality to look and feel.

  • Yes, It is thing which needs to be said
    (and _considered_).

    Once upon a time, when two distributions fit on one CD, it was a good idea to provide catch-all distribution. Now, when even binaries don't fit
    it is better to make a range of distributions.
    "RedHat 6.0 Internet Server"
    "RedHat 6.0 Application Server"
    "RedHat 6.0 Graphic Workstation"
    "RedHat 6.0 Developer Workstation"
    and so on. Each of them would fit on one cd
    (may be even with sources), and default install
    would better fit to purpose. And you'll have
    no troubles to download and install bunch of
    rpms if you suddenly decide to convert your
    graphic worstation to internet server.
    Or special add-on CD can be released, which
    contains all the srpms which may not included
    in any branch of distribution. (Once you are
    accustomized with "Home version", you probably
    know how to install from srpm when you decide
    to run web server)
  • see ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/linux/redhat/redhat-5.2/i3 86/RedHat/RPMS/WindowMaker-0.20.1-3.i386 .rpm

    However, I'm not sure it installed by default....
  • Window Maker is included with RH5.2. It's just not installed by default. You'll find it in the RPMS directory. Personally, I find it much more elegant and useful than Afterstep (which does get installed by default I believe).
  • I should also remind you to install WMPrefs which is also in the RPMS directory. It's a very nice
  • Anybody know if they're going to go with a decent window manager this time... WindowMaker perhaps... dare I say it, even KDE? Anything but that God-awful embarassment FVWM thingy. If RedHat was my first view of Linux, which it is for many people, I'd be put off right there.
  • Yes, yes yes. I know alternatives comes with 5.2. My point is the default, which is what most new users will stick with until they are competent enough to change it, is terrible. If RH started up in a nicer environment, folks might be more inclined to stick with it until they figure out how to change the bloody thing.
  • My understanding is that they are releasing it 6.0 because of the new kernel, the finalized version of GNOME 1.0 (which has some really nice code by the way), and a rewritten manual, and other features. The rumour is that the installation will be somewhat different as well. Some programs will be dropped and others will be included that normally havn't been in Red Hat releases. After all I really didn't see much difference between Red Hat 5.0,5.1,and 5.2 Thanks God that we're more concerned with good code and functionality than backwords compatability. :-) It should be a kick-A#&! release. I guess we'll just have to see.

    Cheers,

    Nick
  • Couple things here. First I'm using LinuxConf
    ver. linuxconf-1.13r12-1 It is your responsibility to upgrade it...not theirs.

    Customer Service, (even they admit) has been cruddy. They are in the process of restructering their department to provide the enterpise level support they have been talking about. (as a test) I recently spoke to a staff member at Red Hat regarding support and was told to contact a support partner. When I asked for the names of them he told me to look at the web site.

    If I did that I would soon be out of business.
    I suspect that Red Hat has been growing through some growing pains. As the owner of a technology company myself, I know what they are going through.

    RE: FTP Sites. They could stand to put up two more servers on site in a redundant array of many gigs. that should suffice and wouldn't be prohibitively expensive.

    Price: I would not mind spending $100.00 for a Linux distribution. I might be mistaken on this but I've heard Caldera is going to go to a licensing system (why I have no idea, I think this would be very bad)??

    Cheers,

    Nick

    PS: M$ is a brilliant example of a single company, using free resources, bundling them together in 20 year old technology and markting them to the public for an outlandish fee.

  • Let me assure you that many of the errors in GNOME pre-releases are being fixed. I've spoken (and emailed bug reports) to many of the folks at RH-LAbs and The Midnight Commander people regarding it's issues. Frederico has been doing been improvements in GMC and it should be "Pretty Damn Cool" (tm) I just like GNOME better than KDE because KDE looks to much like the TK widget set and it is so blocky looking. I also like the GTK/GDK API better ... just my HO.. KDE has some cool stuff though... I like the menu editor!

    Cheers,

    Nick
    LSG
  • Just for info, our company uses ICEWM and GNOME.
    I like IceWM becuase it is simple, fast, and no bloat. GNOME works well with it and we don't even bother to install AFterStep, or WindowMaker etc.

    If Red Hat just ships with E, GNOME, ICEWM, and KDE I'll be a happy camper.


    Nick
    LSG
  • I suspect the guy who said that is an M$ plant....
    Trying to cause more rift in the community.
    You'll be seeing alot more of that soon.
  • I suspect the guy who said that is an M$ plant....
    Trying to cause more rift in the community.
    You'll be seeing alot more of that soon.


    Nick
    LSG
  • Red Hat does pretty much _everything_ well. If you use it as a server, you have to work around the bugs and the updates. If you use it as a home system, you have to manually set up your GUI ( not a big deal, but newbies sure seem to hate vi) to get something decent.

    But Debian does the rock-solid-server thing _really_ well. Very SA friendly and runs like a kitten-the most bugfree release out there.

    And, as much as I hate using it ( YaST is a beast and KDE eats up too much real estate on my desktop and RAM), SuSe does provide the beginner a friendly experience. I dislike SuSe for the same reasons RMS does, but beginning users really don't care about politics. They just want to have something that runs while they learn about all the neat things they can do under Linux that they never would have fathomed under Windows.

    And for a corporate desktop, a group that promotes the term "open source" because it hides their underlying hipocrisy regarding information freedom, where TCO and reliabilty are the issue, then Caldera does a fine job at that, again much better than Red Hat.

    To put it bluntly, Red Hat isn't the best at anything. But they are _good_ at everything. One is forced to wonder if this compromise has become popular with the crowd who does _everything_ on their Linux system ( and thus advocates the platform, drawing in newbies).

  • With the 6.0 release, I will be placing my expectations high, and RedHat will need to meet them to keep me from drifting to another distro.

    Among the changes I would like to see:
    • Linuxconf done right. The current version is shameful.
    • Customer services at RedHat improved. With the influx of cash they have received from outside vendors, they need to run a better FTP site for packages.

    The last time I asked for this last item here, RedHat personnel responded that there were many mirrors and the money would be better spent on other things. Balderdash I say - they had better get their act together and quit assuming others will pick up their slack. They've got the money - there is no room for excuses.

    RedHat and Linux in general are making huge strides towards delivering a quality product at a great price, but I really want to see them go the last 10% and do it right. I'd rather spend $20 more and get the finished product done right.
  • I gather that KDE is further along in terms of development, but is there some fundamental feature that makes it worth looking at?

    KDE 1.0 is very easy to use, has nice, consistent looking tools that can interoperate, there are equivalents to most Win tools, and nearly everything can be configured graphically. It also offers the best filemanager for X and the window manager with the most features. kISDN is about the only easy way to set up an ISDN connection if you haven't a SuSE distro.

    IN short, it's a must for newbies, great for users, and nice, but not necessary for sysadmins.

    KDE 1.1 however, is a totally different beast (should be KDE 2 IMO anyway).
    It offers *real* functionality, is more flexible, bug-free, better integrated etc.
    Just to name a few features:
    • Konqueror, the web browser part of kfm, has dramatically improved. It can absolutely compete with Netscape on most areas now (not Raptor, however, no CSS yet), features Javascript!
    • New editor (syntax highlighting etc.), terminal emu, many other standard tools improved
    • kDiskavigator
    • Much more things configurable in the K Control Center, flexible keybindings, KDE colorsetting for non-KDE apps like XEmacs etc., GUI for keyboard setting, theme manager...
    • needs less memory, is yet faster (kfm)
    • better integration and cooperation of apps with system wide address book, better pager, cut&paste util, system info tools ...
    • application like korganizer etc greatly improved.
    • all known bugs removed
    • more individual look with easy-to-use theme manager, new icons, wallpapers, themes, Mac-like common menubar

    The most important point is the increased maturity. They haven't tried to introduce new and funky technologies and experiments, but made real improvements 'under the hood' not only on the surface.

    KDE 1.0 was more or less a 'pretty face' and offered some very useful tools as well (kppp,kisdn,kfm). This will be similar with Gnome 1.0 (which is an even prettier face, and implements some interesting ideas).


    KDE 1.1 is a real step forward. It has leading applications on X in nearly all areas, is highly mature and very well integrated with other, non-KDE applications. Together with e.g. StarOffice, you get an extremely competitive system.
    For home users, it offers much more customizability (like choice of different compliant window managers), and for corporate use it is a proven, secure and stable alternative to Windows. As logical errors in the user interface have beeern largely eradicated, employees will need no long training to use it.

    I'm sure many of those bitching here will be pretty surprised by KDE 1.1
  • RedHat *definitely* need to make their ftp servers usable. they accept so few connections that they're pretty much always full. the company is getting big, they surely can afford a bit more bandwith!
  • I'm not a RH user. I use debian. I'm probably wrong about this, but can't anyone use any kernel? I'm currently running 2.2.0pre8 just fine. Sure you need ipchains, but not many people are implementing firewall/network stuff.
  • While I agree that RH releases quite often, every two years would be too seldoom. Had they done that, they might have missed the 2.0 kernel all-together. I don't think Debian waits two years, either.

    Why didn't you just stay with 4.2? If it ain't broke...

    3fer
  • Hm. 5.2 instable? 5.0 was full of security holes (yes, I run 5.0), and 5.1 I never used. 5.2 is just a heavily patched 5.1 which is just a heavily patched 5.0, and since 5.0 is stable, I don't see how 5.2, even if slightly more instable, could be less then reliable.
  • From the looks of RawHide, 6.0 will likely have GNOME, KDE, and WindowMaker. Now, they need to either use kdm or modify xdm to allow window manager selection at login time. I've hacked my system here to allow me to select E or KWM from the kdm login screen.
  • And I'm not talking about fvwm2 here. That's too big and bloated. The original fvwm is the best. It's small, it's fast and sleek, AND it has a seemless virtual desktop. Everything a window manager should be.
  • KDE is just wonderfully simple to use and learn and add onto and configure.

    I like its file directory program a lot better than Midnight Express, although it does have its occasional problem. (Like when I want to look at a directory's file listings -- if there's an index.htm file, that's all that appears and not the file listing. I have to look for a solution on that one.)

    But everything is integrated really well. It's easy to look at, it comes with its own flavor of all the programs you'd need to get started with a computer.

    I'll probably give GNOME a test when 1.0 comes out, but until then KDE is what saved Linux for me.

    -Augie
  • I'm using Linux-Mandrake, which defaults to KDE. On the start-up (login) screen, it has an option as to what window manager you wish to start off in. So I'm sure it wouldn't be a big problem to incorporate that in. It's a handy program, too, in that it has an icon for all the users on the system so you can click on yourself rather than typing your name in, in case you're really lazy. ;-)

    -Augie, fast turning into a KDE Evangelist
  • Most of the complaints about RedHat posted here are based on a poster's single gripe. If you have only one gripe with a product it can't be all that bad.

    Its not much use saying RH 4.2 was stable, and RH 5.2 isn't. Its not a one way street. Most of the security fixes in recent versions fix problems that were there in every older version. They are just part of the process of refining stuff.

    RedHat has problems, but the time consuming problems I get are usually nothing to do with RedHat. Like I have hassle at the moment with a lot of incompatible versions of GTK. Now its a great package, and I know they need to make incompatible changes to create a better world for the future. Its hard to eliminate the hassles I get. Nevertheless, I think this type of problem is where most of us spend most of our problem solving time.

    I use RH5.2 on a 486, a Pentium and an Alpha. Its OK on the Intel chips, but the Alpha has some REAL problems. Seg. faults on Intel seem to exist, but be a rarity (I have only seen a couple). On Alpha you get frequent alignment faults. Also, I fill the whole of my 64MB of RAM just by booting and starting X. RISC code is bigger, but not THAT much.
  • Yes, I think most of us have Linuxconf 1.13r12-1 So what? Its a joke. As a proof of concept it would be OK, and I would say they may be heading in a good direction, but they call it 1.something. That is what makes it a joke. There is hardly anything it will configure properly.

    Worst of all RedHat describe it as the bee's knees in configuration software. Not the future bee's knees, but the "we were blown away when we saw this package" right now bee's knees.
  • A couple of things... First, I do see KDE & QT 1.42 in the current Raw Hide tree. Granted, it might not get included in Red Hat 6.0, but I think it likely, especially since QT 2.0 will be supposedly Open Source (leaving aside any debates on the nature of the QPL)... Perhaps Red Hat is experimenting with it for its own purposes to get ready for it? In any case, they have not said anything publicly about their complete reversal of direction on this issue, after stating that they were completely opposed to it... So who knows??

    As to kernel 2.2... Red Hat has DEADLINES to meet on releasing the new versions. Notice that 5.2 shipped with a pre-version of the 2.0.36 kernel (package hence named as 2.0.36-0.7), and 5.1 shipped with a 2.0.34-0.7. I noticed also that the Raw Hide trees that were around before the release of 5.2 included the most recent 2.1 kernel they could get their hands on at the time... When 5.2 finally came out, it included the most recent stable kernel they could get their hands on... The pre-2.0.36 version they had. I suspect that Red Hat was getting fed up waiting for Alan Cox to release the final 2.0.36, hence the pre-version in the release, just so they could meet the release deadline. At this point though, with 2.2 now in the pre stage, I suspect they will release the latest pre-2.2 they can get their hands on, if the final release is not yet available. That is my best guess, based on my experience in the past.
  • While attending Lisa 98 (USENIX) in boston I took a class on linux as a server (so work would allow it to be used there) by the head sysadmin at redhat. He was asked and did say that as far a he knows RH 6.0 will be with kernel 2.2.0 but of course that could change......
  • Too bad he's earning in Turkish Lira...
  • Hmm... That's a first :-) Not that I don't think that the cooperation between RedHat and Corel is great - it is. But RedHat is still dwarfed by Corel, so it is a bit funny to see someone talking about Corel being backed by RedHat, instead of the other way around.
  • Exactly what prevent you from installing KDE rpms even if it's not included by default?

    And as for Gnome vs KDE, it's no problems getting Gnome to look as "clean and sleek" as KDE if that's what you want. Personally I think that's boring. I run a fairly clean look, and I just love the draggable screen functionality in Enlightenment, and the look of themed GTK...

    As for functionality and stability, the only piece of Gnome (0.99.1) I've had problems with is gmc (the Gnome frontend for Midnight Commander) - but I've not enjoyed using a GUI file manager since the Amiga Workbench and Disk Manager II anyways ;).. Even though TkDesk gets close for a Disk Manager replacement.

  • I think that you segmentation faults were probably related to your dev kernel and not to 5.2 as a scratch OS(2.0.36). I have done the same with gnome .992 and .993. I did have some problems with failed dependencies of the Imlibs but I think this was a bug with .992. I did'nt have this problem with .993. You might also want to check your hardware compatibility and memory.

  • Yes: 6.0 (Score:1)

    by odi ( 97628 )
    There will be some major package updates in the new distribution (such as kernel 2.2.0, glibc 2.1, gnome 1.0 (?), kde 1.1 (?) and others).
    You can still argue that they should go with 5.3, but there are as many pro's as there are con's.

    btw, we are sure that Red Hat will use 6.0, because they mention it in the rpm changelogs of some other rawhide rpms : e.g. the cxhextris rpm (changelog available at
    http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/rawhide/1.0/sparc/ RedHat/RPMS/cxhextris-1.0-13.sparc.html )

    (as you can see, they made the decision more than a month ago.)

Slashdot Top Deals

Most public domain software is free, at least at first glance.

Close