Erik Williamson wrote: 2 years? then Debian is for you. I don't know others that they offer 2 years of lifetime _free_ Fedora lifetime is from 6 to 9 *months* http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html I would like to see an extension of 6 months more, more or less. At least for _base_(kernel....) components. -- SCO before, Smoking Crack Often now.

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 17:31, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: 1) Read the FAQ and website. 2) If you NEED long term stability then you are going to have to pay for it. You can either pay Red Hat for RHEL, pay an outside contractor to maintain packages for 2 year length of time, or pay people inside your company to maintain those packages. 3) If you dont really NEED long term stability you can hope that there will be enough interest in Fedora Legacy so that older releases will be maintained by people. However those will be volunteers and may drop a package at any time. I dont expect that this will be any different for any of the Linux companies and volunteer orgs (Debian) in the coming years. Everytime there is a new Debian, the security volunteers say they will only maintain the old release for 6 months and there is great wailing and nashing of teeth about how shitty Debian is. In the end, there is no such thing as a free lunch/coke/os. The first one might seem free, but eventually its gonna cost ya. -- Stephen John Smoogen smoogen(a)lanl.gov Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645 Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --

That's our point. When you deploy on hundreds of servers, like many of the consortium members do, there's no chance in heck that we're going to pay a minimum of $179 (on up to $2500 IIRC) *PER* server. I'd much prefer to pool resources and distribute the cost. -Chuck -- Quantum Linux Laboratories - ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology * Education | -=^ Ad Astra Per Aspera ^=- * Integration | http://www.quantumlinux.com * Support | chuckw(a)quantumlinux.com

That speaks to both sides of the argument. Quite honestly, that deal looks really tempting *IF* I actually needed RHWS. What I do need is a stable production OS (which I'm sure RHWS could be tweaked to do if I had the time [1]). I understand, RedHat needs to pay the bills. I personally think they're going about it the wrong way. I'd be happy to pay $1000 for a copy of RHEL that I can deploy to *ONLY* our own customers (with no restriction on the number of customers) without the expectation of *ANY* support from RedHat. I'd even be happy to pay a nominal fee (perhaps $25 or so per month) so I can rsync my own updates archive to deploy to said customers. -Chuck [1] This begs the question, if you don't have the time to tweak RHWS, then how do you have the time to participate in rh-consortium? My response: One has a future, the other doesn't. I'm just placing my effort where I belive it will do the most good. -- Quantum Linux Laboratories - ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology * Education | -=^ Ad Astra Per Aspera ^=- * Integration | http://www.quantumlinux.com * Support | chuckw(a)quantumlinux.com

Does Fedora have a bug-tracking system? I would hope for a Bugzilla or similar to organize feedback. Also, how many core developers do you have? Has RedHat loaned you any, etc. Federico Rocks Cluster Group, San Diego Supercomputing Center, CA

On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 00:01, Sean Earp wrote: It doesn't really work that way. It's more like people own technical areas and cover them in both Fedora Project and RHEL. For example, I own a bunch of GNOME stuff in both of those. Havoc

On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 06:23 AM, Bill Anderson wrote: What percentage of the RPM spec files are GPL'd? As I understand it, a SRPM is: 1. Source tarball 2. Patches 3. Spec file. Of course 1, 2 must be disclosed publicly by the legal definition of GPL. The spec file is interesting, if it was derived from one provided by the package authors (not redhat) then it must be dislosed. If it was originally GPL'd by redhat in an earlier release, and a derivation is used in the current RHEL product, it must be disclosed (you cant un-GPL your software). There may be some other cases with a different outcome. Federico Rocks Cluster Group, San Diego Supercomputing Center, CA

David Chait wrote: because its development cycle is looooonger, exactly 2 years or sometimes more. Then it's natural and easy for Debian to have longer lifetimes. -- :x

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 19:50, David Chait wrote: That's a lot more thru accident than design. ~,^ The Debian folks would love to release more often, if they could manage to bring together (Which I fear Fedora may come to be if Red Hat doesn't keep a *very* strict policy about packages going into Core vs. Extras.) -- Sean Middleditch <elanthis(a)awesomeplay.com&gt; AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.

Or join the rh-consortium and help pool the necessary resources to provide that support. Mailing list here: http://www.quantumlinux.com/mailman/listinfo/rh-consortium We're keeping a close eye on Fedora Legacy. If it does what we need, then we're home free. If not, then that's what we're doing this for. -Chuck -- Quantum Linux Laboratories - ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology * Education | -=^ Ad Astra Per Aspera ^=- * Integration | http://www.quantumlinux.com * Support | chuckw(a)quantumlinux.com

On Sep 30, 2003, "Benjamin J. Weiss" <benjamin(a)Weiss.name&gt; wrote: You may want to convince him to join the Fedora Legacy project. Or, if he wants something supported by Red Hat for a longer period, Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Which came at a cost. Who paid for that? -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva(a){redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva(a){lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer

Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: And many of us would still be happy to... That is a very interesting observation. Is RH aware that they have positioned themselves thus in the market? If i were Sun, i'd be taking a big marketing opportunity to throw a few extras into their solution (like clustering software, etc.) show how Solaris is cheaper than Linux and thumb their nose at everyone and say "We were right all along". Paul "Jef Spaleta has too many nicknames" Gear http://paulgear.webhop.net -- A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should i start my reply below the quoted text?

Red Hat does not have to charge their prices to stay solvent. Their only business need is to increase productivity and profit. It is now a publicly traded company and has a responsibility to the stock holders (whether or not I like it). As for losing business, there are many times in which losing customers is more profitable than keeping them. I started my home based business servicing home computers on-site at a low rate. After a while, I was constantly driving, working or talking on the phone. I eventually tripled my rates, dropped most of my home support and retained 3 commercial customers. Even though I lost my one biggest account, I only needed to work about 1 or two days a week and my "keep" pay was the same as when I was busting my @$$ all week long. Likewise, Red Hat is probably catering to their "million-dollar" accounts that require less overhead to service and dropping their customers that might be making a profit, but costs them more to service and support. Sure, they may lose 25% of their "business" but what remains will be much more profitable leaving them with more time and resources to service their contracts, improve their product and work with Fedora. Well, that's my $.02 (or less) worth. Really, it's just business. Buck -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of David Holden Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 5:17 AM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com; Benjamin J. Weiss; Alexandre Oliva Cc: fedora-list(a)redhat.com Subject: Re: Fedora and the System Administrator On Wednesday 01 Oct 2003 1:43 am, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: If redhat can only stay solvent by charging $349 for there stable linux (remember thats the "cheap" version isn't AS > $1000) I find it very worrying for the competitiveness of Linux generally. In the short term I think they will make more money from people who will find it too costly to move to another OS but in the longer term I think they will lose a lot of business. Dave. -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. ------------------------------------------------------------- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Quoting David Holden <dh(a)iucr.org&gt;: Er, I have to disagree because I think you're making some assumptions that are incorrect. You see, Microsoft's "shrink wrapped" products _are_ (and _always_ have been) currently defnined by its enterprise customers, and large volume sales. The fact that they also sell on the retail shelves is just to further that volume even more. But the small volume consumers have _no_say_ in the product's design, simply because they are not worth Microsoft's bother from a financial perspective. Red Hat is basically moving to this same model with a twist. Like Microsoft, it let's its "shrink wrapped" products be defined by its enterprise customers, because it's not worth it to spend money to accomodate the small guy. But unlike Microsoft, they give the community basically everything in their "shrink wrapped" products. That way the smaller volume community has a way to define its products into what _they_ want as well. I think Red Hat has got the "best of both worlds" down from a business and consumer standpoint. The only fear I have is this. I just hope the "QA/integration testing" that I am used to in Red Hat Linux is still available in Fedora Linux, without suffering the "tag lag" like we see with Debian Stable. I.e., I used to find Red Hat Linux the best of both QA/integration testing and half-way recent/current packages. In the Debian world, the two see to be mutually exclusive -- Stable = former, Testing = latter. And, of course, Mandrake is totally the latter, nothing of the former. ;-ppp -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

Quoting David Holden <dh(a)iucr.org&gt;: First off, the last time I checked, RHEL WS is $179/year (or are you talking about ES?). Secondly, Microsoft has the volume to sustain security updates on a $99-199 product. Red Hat does not. *BUT* if you keep your Fedora Core current to at least 6 months, possibly a year (if I'm reading the details correctly), you _do_ have such updates. If you need 1-7 years, then you need to purchase a product that will support the vendor who does it, given the volume they sell at. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

On Thursday 02 Oct 2003 4:44 pm, Bryan J. Smith wrote: yes ES. Of course which is back to my original post, about the cost of doing this, assuming the WS edition (>3x179) again $99-199. Yes this is find if keeping Fedora core current doesn't break important things that users are used to, e.g. kde desktop settings etc.. Of course and again back to my original post, Dave -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org> Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html> UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. -------------------------------------------------------------

On Thursday 02 Oct 2003 6:51 pm, William Hooper wrote: I agree with this, and personally there is no way I would use M$ product, but the point is that we are not comparing apples with apples, Microsoft has a great deal of inertia and mind share on its side with "non-techical" managers so to get them to move linux has to be a way better value proposition. After a great deal of debate I managed to persuade my bosses that the "old redhat" proposition ($60/year 2-3year security updates) was worth giving up the windows desktop (Office/Photoshop/IE/Outlook..all the things he knows well) for Linux. Then redhat suddenly says "no, its now $180/year and $345/year for a server version". So the cost has now tripled on the desktop and x6 on the server. This still might be comparable even somewhat better value that Windows but its blown a big hole in one of my arguments for moving to linux, I suspect that there are quite a few small businesses who have not already made the jump won't be on these prices. Dave. -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org> Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html> UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. -------------------------------------------------------------

David Holden said: [snip] Repeat after me, Fedora is not Red Hat. If the Fedora Legacy project can get you 2-3 years then it will be the Fedora Legacy project doing it, not Red Hat. IIRC your $345 also gets you any new versions of RHEL that comes out. I would also ask if you really need that many copies of ES or would WS do for most of it (I mean heck, it has Apache even). You also have the choice of finding a third party to provide you support. I've seen on these lists a couple of places that are offering to support Valhalla after Red Hat EOLs it. -- William Hooper

On Thursday 02 Oct 2003 4:48 pm, William Hooper wrote: I've no need to repeat this, I'm well aware of the difference thanks. The above was making precisely the point that redhat won't be providing security updates to Fedora. This is a good and certainly $179 is better that $345 Yes this is back to my post about how competitive linux, re cost. Dave. -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org> Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html> UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. -------------------------------------------------------------

Quoting Edward Croft <ecroft(a)openratings.com&gt;: Huh? All BlueCurve is, is a theme, icon and default application set for each KDE and GNOME. You still have _full_ KDE and GNOME. I don't see your point at all. In fact, I don't think you do either. Huh? What is Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS then? Mandrake is like Debian Unstable on a bad day. But that's just me. ;-ppp SuSE offers similar to Red Hat now. They offer their "consumer" Personal/Professional as well as their "Enterprise" series. The _difference_ between Red Hat and SuSE, other than the fact that Red Hat is no longer shrink wrapping its "consumer" versions (hence Fedora) is that Red Hat is GPL-anal and SuSE is _not_. So if you're making a "big deal" about Red Hat's recent moves, I don't think SuSE offers a compelling "alternative" based on your own criteria. I'm not saying SuSE is "worse" than Red Hat, I'm just saying based on _your_logic_, they are "not better." As such, I can only deduce this is a "I hate #1" attitude. That is not fair to Red Hat just as it is not fair to Microsoft when people do the same. There are legitimate complains to make of Red Hat, just like there are for Microsoft (actually, a crapload for the latter in comparison), but I do not see this as one of those. Sorry. I don't know so much if it is "dictating," but if you mean that Red Hat is following Microsoft's attitude of "volume focus, enterprise focus," yes, I agree. That's just smart business. Dislike them for it, but I see nothing "unethical" about it. [ NOTE: There are far more "unethical" things to pick on in the case of Microsoft. But don't beat them up for just focusing on volue. Again, that's just smart business. So Red Hat's a follower ... not the first, not the last. ] But unlike Microsoft, or even SuSE and many other UnitedLinux distros, Red Hat is _still_ "GPL-anal." Everything Red Hat does is basically GPL. All the projects the start, support and otherwise put at the _cornerstone_ of their product. Can't say the same for SuSE nor most of the UnitedLinux partners, from the Installer to their various, product-only nick-nacks. And Red Hat has taken away "choice"? All I've seen is that they've made some hard decisions, but have instigated what it believes are more choices. The only thing they are taking away is the "free lunch." GPL is Freedom, not Free-of-Cost. And you have that choice, yes. How Red Hat fits either in or out of that choice, versus yesterday, today or the future, I have not seen you make that point yet, which you seem you must make. Again, I am confused. Via Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS? ES? Or Fedora Linux? So you will look at neither Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS nor Fedora Linux for the desktop? I'm a bit confused on your logic. Bryan J. Smith Linux+, LPIC-2, RHCE(9) -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

Quoting Michael Lee Yohe <michael.yohe(a)us.army.mil&gt;: It looks like I just caught someone having a semi-brain fart on a few things (based on an off-list correspondence). And as far as brain fart goes, I think I'll best all of you in both the quantity and quality departments, so you better get used to writing even better ones when I have my farts. They don't call me "TheBS" for 'nothin. Naah. I'm already providing more entertainment than substance. I'm a total mooch. I don't contribute much code. I think I've contributed maybe 300 lines total in the 10 years I've been using Linux (8 years in corporate environments). I spend 3 years with a civilian contractor under the BMDO, largely in support of Army PAC-3 and THAAD (I'm an "Angineer" -- i.e. Anal Engineer -- by education and some experience). You anywhere near 'dat coolie stuff??? -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 17:18, Chuck Wolber wrote: And how do you like it? Like I said, I adapted to BlueCurve, but had really been looking forward to KDE 3. I like Evolution, some things I would like to see, like read receipts and importance, but for the most part it works. Would have been nice if they had a connector that worked with Exchange 5.5 since a lot of people are still running that. Though we are looking at Exchange 2003, Samsung Contact, Communigate Pro, and Byanari.

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 10:40, Edward Croft wrote: Bluecurve. is. a. THEME/default app settings. Quoth the Raven "Nothing more". Maybe it's me, but I'd think an RHCE would know that. ;) Maybe you missed the Enterprise Desktop announcement that was ALL over the press like a year ago was it I CHOSE the easier option: I switched my theme. GO ahead, feel free to choose to remain at the mercy of a commercial entity for your desktop. Me, I'll move on to Fedora and enjoy a current system, regardless of the time of year. One that is updated on my schedule, and includes the updates I want. And I'll use the rpm-based distro that lets me volunteer to maintain packages, set up my own repository and add my own things to the channels if I so choose: Fedora. That's what choice is all about. Fedora will give us more choice than we had with RH boxed set and accompanying system, not lessen it. You may *feel* that RH is somehow forcing things on you and dictating to you by opening up the consumer level distribution to the rest of us, but until you can back it up, it's nothing more than an unsubstantiated feeling. Hope you enjoy the proprietary installer/sysadmin tool that SuSE dictates. Cheers, Bill -- Bill Anderson RHCE #807302597505773 bill(a)noreboots.com

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 07:20, Edward Croft wrote: I don't fault Ed on anything here, there was a lot of complaining on BlueCurve, and that's just what he heard. I chaulk it all up to "you can't please everyone," because Red Hat was targeting the "non-Linux user" who often heard the bigotry of "Linux needs a single interface." Here's the basic bullet points on why people said what they did: 1) Red Hat is _clearly_ a GNOME-centric company. Unintentionally this causes Red Hat to make GNOME-oriented choices. 2) One Red Hat staffer who supported a lot of the KDE stuff resigned over various details (not related to BlueCurve). Many people then proliferated that he resigned over BlueCurve. I don't know the details myself, but this is what was relayed to me 2nd hand. 3) Many of the default applications for _both_ platforms were GNOME. E.g., the default web browser for KDE was Mozilla, not Konqueror. I could see why KDE would get a little "disturbed at that." 4) You _could_easily_ reset everything "back to defaults." But many people found it even easier just to "bitch" instead of doing that. ;-ppp In a nutshell Ed, Red Hat gets a lot of flak it doesn't deserve. Yes, they make choices that make some people upset. And they _are_ clearly "GNOME-biased," but it's unintentional. You always have other choices though. People have problems upgrading to the latest versions of GNOME, KDE, etc... all the time. Yeah, the last thing you wanted was "more change." Understand totally. ;-ppp Try to install _two_ different versions of MS Office on the same Windows system. Where people see "hard to install" with regard to Linux, I see "DLL hell" with regards to Windows. So what is it? Easy installing or DLL hell because the platform does _not_ have dependency checking? There's no win-win situation, although apt-rpm is getting pretty damn easy. Whoa! Time out. That is _not_ a Linux issue! That's a site/vendor issue! Linux developers can do _little_ about that. Next you'll be blaming Linux for unsupported hardware. If you start blaming Linux developers for clearly 100% site/vendor issues, then there is no way to please you. You have to ask Linux developers for things they _can_ do. Emulation never truly "works right." And that's because of vendor alliances and other business dealings. Yep, sure, that's the fault of Linux developers. Yep. Damn I'm good! [ I knew you would come here ] Exactomundo. Now put it together ... - I can only view something on one OS - Hardware is tied to only one OS Hmmm, that means that I have to get my OS and hardware from select vendors! And I have to upgrade my hardware _every_ time I upgrade my OS. And my OS vendor forces me to upgrade my OS! Wow! Maybe there's some things going on that _force_ you into this situation??? Let's blame it on the Linux developers for not "giving me a way out" of my vendor lock-in. Because Linux developers can do _nothing_ about the problems you have above. Exactomundo. [ At least you get that part ;-] Well, I see your points. I hope you see mine in return. ;-ppp -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org

Quoting Edward Croft <ecroft(a)openratings.com&gt;: I'm at the opposite of the spectrum. I started introducing Linux on Corporate networks back in 1995. From 1998- 2002, my #1 responsibility was Linux. I moved 1100 miles 2 months ago (at my own expense) to take on a major Linux project once again, at a Fortune 20 company no less, only to see it cancelled 3 weeks into my employment. So now I'm back to 0% Linux (at the same Fortune 20 company). If anything is good in my life, it is my wife of 6 years. I think we're going to make it past the "7 year itch" which is now a half a year away. I've had numerous situations where a vertical application was still using Access 95 or 97 components when we've moved to 97, 2000 or, more recently, XP. And MS Word 97/2000/XP are "supposedly" the same format, but that is not simply so. Throw MS Word for Mac 98, 2001, etc... into the mix and you might as well "bend over." Again, I'll take Linux package dependency hell _any_day_ over Windows' ease-of- installation. BTW, from a pure security standpoint, software should _never_ be installed with its own binary. Plus I liken to an OS that has a filesystem that _forces_ you to tell it a file is "executable." ;-ppp And you should do that to a hardware vendor. But the problem is that most hardware vendors do _not_ like an OS that is perpetual when it comes to drivers. They want to "align" with an OS that _forces_ you to upgrade your hardware, _including_ peripherials, every 2-3 years. As I always say, if Microsoft had to write their own drivers, they'd be SOL. Not so. Understand that _most_ hardware _is_ supported by Linux nowdays _except_ for hardware that is _purposely_designed_ to only have drivers for 2-3 to _force_ you to upgrade. Such hardware, and their vendors, will _never_ support Linux. As such, Linux doesn't solve the larger issue of "let the buyer beware" which applies to Windows users as well. But why not run Windows then? I really don't have a problem with the Windows OS itself -- namely the NT kernel -- it's all the crap that applications have thrown atop of it, forced it to accomodate, etc... Most of the NT developers at Microsoft are very smart cookies, but the tools deveopers, application developers and, ultimiately, their own IT division, are in order of increasing incompetence with with their _own_ OS. That's good. Because in 5 years when they want to edit them, they will be screwed if they are in MS formats. As one Microsoft Office for Mac developer documented, it's not just the "forced upgrade" approach of Microsoft's Windows applications. It's the larger issue of "data alignment ignorace" in their Windows applications. I have no such issues myself. The community version works great for me under Mozilla/Galeon. ??? I downloaded the community version of RealPlayer in RPM format myself. It works on all version from Red Hat 6 - 9. Why? I upgraded from 4.2 to 7.1 (including 5.0, 5.2, 6.0 and 6.2 inbetween), temporarily reloaded 7.2 new when trying out SGI XFS, then when back to stock 7.3 and upgraded to 9 (including 8.0) where I am now. Many times I upgraded "live" -- e.g., 6.0 -> 6.2 by merely using RPM from the command-line (I didn't do that for major X in X.Y version changes though, I used the installer). I've done this with production servers as well. Huh? FireWire not supported? Really??? FireWire, like SCSI, has a _detailed_ command set. USB, like parallel, does not. [ Long story on USB, but basically that's why you didn't see devices for 3 years after you had mainboard/OS support. Microsoft and Intel put very _little_ into the "host-end" standard. It's also why USB devices often _conflict_, because must of the "brains" are in the end-device drivers, not the host driver. ] I'm still using an 9 year old Microtek Scanmaker III SCSI as my flatbed. As far as feeder, I'm using a $59 HP OfficeJet V40. And my wife, she has a $439 HP LaserJet 1220se (which has the scan/copy functionality, plus native Postscript 2). Love it as well. Bruce Parens did a great job of getting HP "on board." Some of it will _not_ change (as I mentioned above). "Companies and consumers must be deligent in their choices of hardware and software as vendors will NEVER offer a way out of lock-in." -- Gartner Group (paraphrased) -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 12:40:49 -0400, Edward Croft wrote: You can disable "Bluecurve". It's only a common theme for KDE and GNOME. Pick another nice theme. - -- Michael, who doesn't reply to top posts and complete quotes anymore.

On Thursday 02 Oct 2003 10:05 pm, Bill Anderson wrote: ok, let me rei-write that sentence "The above was making precisely the point that redhat won't be providing security updates to Fedora *version "x"* covering the following 2-3 years of its release" is this correct? Most of what you say below re-enforces the above sentence no? Personally the most important thing for me is security updates thats what I subscribe to rhn for. Dave. -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org> Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html> UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. -------------------------------------------------------------

You mean with commercial Linux for the desktop? Suse and Lindows are both taking a stab at that market. I can't imagine that RH wants to ignore that market completely. It is that market that promises a tremendous growth opportunity. The server market though still growing is starting to mature. I imagine that in the next 2-4 years we should see the server growth slowly decreasing while the desktop market will continue to show increasing growth. That is if it is possible to determine what the real growth of Linux on desktops is. -Chris On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 07:48, David Holden wrote: "Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." - Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

For me, it looks like it will be SuSE. I will be checking it out this weekend. Buck -----Original Message----- From: David Holden [mailto:dh@iucr.org] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 8:49 AM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com; Buck; 'Benjamin J. Weiss'; 'Alexandre Oliva' Subject: Re: Fedora and the System Administrator All of the above makes sense but leaves the question if redhat only wants the niche market of higher margin enterprise customers what fils the gap for the rest, currently its largely microsoft... Dave. -- Dr. David Holden. (Systems Developer) Crystallography Journals Online: <http://journals.iucr.org> Thanks in advance:- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See: <http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html> UK Privacy (R.I.P) : http://www.stand.org.uk/commentary.php3 Public GPG key available on request. -------------------------------------------------------------

Bryan J. Smith wrote: And I remind you that Red Hat offers ISO images and binarie&sources updates freely for every distribution. SuSE doesn't has free ISO, although you are able to install it through NET and update it. -- :x

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 17:08, Buck wrote: Whoa there Hoss. The update is just that, an update. Compare Professional, not the update. Professional is 80 bucks. The update *service* is 50, bu the website is a bit confusing on the whole thing. The maintenance of packages ofr he life of the product is no the same as using an u2date network service (though to be at least somewhat on topic, Fedora's up2date supports apt and yum for third party tools whereas YOU does not. And Now Fedora will total 7-10 months for maintenance. SuSE says their non-enterprise cycle is 6 months, not 4-6 -- that's Fedora. IIRC< RH says the same thing about Fedora: no SLA Now that this thread is thoroughly hijacked ... For Enterprise Desktops you are looking at: RH: 179/year (Basic) SuSE: 120+100/year (get 5) (Basic) RH "Standard" WS: 300/year -- includes 4 hour SLA on phone support, 2 bus day on web SuSE: Apparently no "Premium" on Desktop. For Enterprise Servers you are looking at: Product Basic Standard Premium RH-AS n/a 1499 2499 RH-ES 349 799 n/a SuSE-ES 750(699/year after) 2250 For RHAS Std Support: See above for desktops. For RHAS Premium Support: pri-1 ticket response time:Web; 1 BD. Phone: 1 hour For SLES "Maintenance" Support: You can download stuff and join a web portal. You get email for security updates. For SLES Premium Support: 2 hour on phone, no SLA on any other means of communication Life cycle: RH: "at least five years" SuSE: 5 years from launch date (not from EOL as some have said) So comparing ES to ES: RH wins hands down on support/price Comparing AS to ES: RH wins hands down on support, for a bit more money. -- Bill Anderson RHCE #807302597505773 bill(a)noreboots.com

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 16:55, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: What are you talking about? Show me where RH AS2.1 in ISO freely available. It's not EVERY distribution. It's only their consumer desktop distributions. You know...the one that they built that gave them a user base that has enabled them to build a profitable business and claim the title of world wide Linux leader. Yeah that one has been freely available....oh except for the 7.* series where they added one CD that they wouldn't distribute. Suse is freely available in the same sense. -Chris "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." - Benjamin Franklin

Quoting Xose Vazquez Perez <xose(a)wanadoo.es&gt;: Damn straight! Quit comparing RH*E*L to SuSE Linux! Compare RHEL to SuSE *Enterprise* Linux! I know there is some "overlap," but it's all the same. I'm open to someone correcting me, but since when is YaST (among about 50 other packages in SuSE Linux) 100% redistributable? How about SuSE Enterprise Linux? And I don't mean in the context of _only_ "certain packaging" (e.g., "evaluation CDs," "loaners," "LUG-only", etc...). -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

I agree. The need or desire dictates the product used. For me, SuSE is more affordable, has long term maintenance and an option for a long term stable product compatible with the rest. For $50 ($10 less than the Red Hat Network) I get an original disc, I can copy and distribute it for free, and I can install it on all the computers I desire. If, on the other hand I desire to sell it, I have to re-sell a legal boxed version. Not a problem for me. I can afford $50 once for 18 - 24 months of "maintenance" the term for what you get from up2date with RH. Please be advised, I am not pushing RH here. I haven't tried it and if I like it when I do, I will probably go that route. I will have to see if I run into any walls or restrictions. It may be that RH will release a similar option before I lock in my decision. Buck -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Bryan J. Smith Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 5:48 PM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com; Buck Cc: dh(a)iucr.org; fedora-list(a)redhat.com; 'Benjamin J. Weiss'; 'Alexandre Oliva' Subject: RE: Fedora and the System Administrator -- Red Hat v. SuSE it is not ... Quoting Buck <RHList(a)towncorp.net&gt;: One thing I want to make clear is that I don't see it as "Red Hat v. SuSE." Both Red Hat and SuSE have their "consumer" products as well as their "Enterprise" products. In the case of Red Hat, it seems the "consumer" products will no longer be shrink wrapped. SuSE will offer its SuSE Linux 9 Professional for x86-64 for $119. But I think _many_ people are _forgetting_ that Red Hat will also be offering its Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 for AMD64 for $179 via download with 1 year subscription. Now SuSE is going to ship the kitchen sink (6 CDs, 1 DVD) whereas Red Hat is shipping a desktop OS with limited services. I'll admit to that. But Red Hat is also shipping a GPL-anal distro, whereas SuSE has a habit to introduce all sorts of non-GPL dependencies. Again, for _me_ (and I do not expect anyone else to feel obligated to agree), I like the Red Hat approach _assuming_ I can build Fedora packages from SRPM on RHEL WS 3.0 AMD64. Again, I'll re-iterate, regardless of whether Fedora is a community or a Red Hat "focus area," it's in Red Hat's best commercial interest to ensure the non- core Fedora packages at least build on their Enterprise series of products. -- Bryan "I've beat this horse beyond 9 lives" Smith -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

I spent 20 minutes on the phone with a SuSE Sales man. I specifically discussed giving a friend of mine a copy of Professional so only one of us would purchase it and we would install it on our home computers and on a group of computers we would be using for practice and learning. Later we would install a copy on a production computer for a business. He said I could give him one and we could install it on all of our computers but if I sold the copy to the business or included it with a computer or other purchased product, I would have to buy a copy for the business. I was not allowed to distribute a copy with any form of financial gain or reimbursement. This was Professional. It doesn't include Open Office, etc. (at least not described on the website). Buck -----Original Message----- From: Bryan J. Smith [mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:09 PM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com; Buck Cc: dh(a)iucr.org; 'Benjamin J. Weiss'; 'Alexandre Oliva' Subject: RE: Fedora and the System Administrator -- are my assumptions on SuSE incorrect? Quoting Buck <RHList(a)towncorp.net&gt;: Whoa whoa whoa whoa ... wait a second! Now I understand my query here on a Red Hat list about SuSE might not be appropriate, but I'm going to go ahead and make it -- prompting for any corrections to my assumptions. I am currently very much under the belief that SuSE CDs (at least through 8.x) are very much _not_ redistributable! Yes, you can pull down a "redistributable" version via packages from the Internet, but I have _never_ seen a SuSE CD (or CD image) that wasn't either a "commercial shrink wrap" for a single (or finite number of) system, or an "evaluation." SuSE's distro relies on non-100% redistributable components. Now you _may_ be able to install it on a number of systems with your purchase, but that is also the case with Sun StarOffice as well -- you can_not_ simply "redistribute" it freely. Am I mistaken on SuSE??? -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

What do they mean by profit? During an install I charge a fee for the installation and some OS tweaking, but it is understood that the OS software itself is free. I might even leave behind a few CDs, but what I charge for is my time as a consultant. Sometimes even that is free if the customer has opted for one of our support contracts. -Chuck -- Quantum Linux Laboratories - ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology * Education | -=^ Ad Astra Per Aspera ^=- * Integration | http://www.quantumlinux.com * Support | chuckw(a)quantumlinux.com

On Thu, 2003-10-02 at 16:09, Bryan J. Smith wrote: Nope. Here's a short, short list: Codeweaver Crossover Office SUN Star Office And more importantly, perhaps: "On how many machines may I install and utilize SuSE Linux Desktop? SuSE Linux Desktop may be installed on every machine for which a separate maintenance agreement was closed. 2. Why does this Linux system only have a license for one workstation? The "normal" Linux components of SuSE Linux Desktop are Open Source and may be copied and utilized pursuant to the applicable licenses (GPL, YaST, etc.). However, the individual components are subject to licenses that limit the deployment to one machine. 3. Do I lose the license when the maintenance agreement expires? No. By purchasing the Maintenance Program once, you obtain the license for the continuous utilization of all components of SuSE Linux as described above. " It is the OP who is incorrect. Note, with all due shock and horror, at number 2 (no, not *that* number 2! ;) ). According to their site, the maintenance program for 1 year on 5 clients is 500 bucks(US). Ouch. for 50 clients it comes to ~85/client/year. Ouch again. Those are just the desktops. http://www.suse.com/us/business/services/support/maintenance/index.html The way I read it, RHN is a bargain by comparison --and is cheaper: Further, SuSE Enterprise 8 is 749 USD. Additional years are 699 for just the "Maintenance program". "Premium support" is 2250/year. IIUI, this is the equivalent of the RH offering. So, for all those considering SuSE because RHEL is "too much". Well, now you're better prepared for the sticker shock. ;) -- Bill Anderson RHCE #807302597505773 bill(a)noreboots.com

I don't CC anyone in a list, but I just discovered a list message with about 5 CCs or additional addresses. I removed all but the list and the message originator. I don't know how many cc's I have replied to before I caught it. Buck -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Michael Schwendt Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:26 PM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com Subject: Re: Fedora and the System Administrator -- Red Hat v. SuSE it is not ... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 18:02:20 -0400, Buck wrote: Is this necessary? Do these people appreciate getting carbon copies of mails which don't even reply to what they have written? - -- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

On Oct 2, 2003, Michael Schwendt <ms-nospam-0306(a)arcor.de&gt; wrote: FWIW, I don't really care. My mailer will delete duplicates, and downloading one more copy of the message is no big deal as long as it's not huge. In fact, I like being Cc:ed when my attention is asked for (e.g., when I took part in a discussion) because my mailer is configured to highlight messages that have my e-mail address in To: or Cc:. As for Reply-To:, I've configured this group in Gnus with (broken-reply-to . t), such that reply goes to the author, and follow-up goes to everybody, as intended. -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva(a){redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva(a){lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer

I am sure: I confirmed on the telephone just a few minutes ago that Professional, Professional Upgrade and Personal can be freely distributed "as long as no profit is involved." Professional Upgrade comes without the manuals but is fully installable. You don't have to be upgrading. Pro: $79.95, Pro Upgrade: $49.95, and Personal: $39.95. One thing about Linux: it has variety. Buck -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Xose Vazquez Perez Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:47 PM To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com Subject: Re: Fedora and the System Administrator -- Red Hat v. SuSE it is not ... Buck wrote: take note: "At the moment_ we are maintaining SuSE Linux for 2 years - that means Bug fixes and Security fixes will be released for two years for each SuSE Linux version. Contrary to our business products with maintenance this is _not_ guaranteed." $40 SuSE Linux 8.2 Personal is very castrated. http://www.suse.com/us/private/products/suse_linux/i386/pers_prof.html Red Hat Linux is cheaper, free. And you are able to get all *ISO* images from NET. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ http://www.suse.com/us/private/support/licenses/yast.html Are you sure of this?. With RH Linux you are free to install it wherever you want. And Modify and sell it under your _own_ name(without rh logos....) -- :x -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Edward Croft wrote: That's correct, firsts mdk distribitions were Red Hat Linux with some updates and new packages. -- :x

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 07:41, Paul Gear wrote: Okay, change my "have" to "had" and I am now correct. Red Hat _used_ to refer to the RHL series as "consumer." Fedora is no longer "consumer" like RHL was. I stand corrected. We now have "Fedora" and "enterprise" : "ethusiast" and "business" -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org

Quoting Paul Gear <paul(a)gear.dyndns.org&gt;: I think that's what they may be doing. But they can't just come right out and say that. It's all about support. What they ship, they have to support (even if it's not a law, nor followed by many Linux distributors, but a Red Hat distro motto ;-) In every case I have played "wait and see" with Red Hat, I have _always_ been pleasantly surprised. I hope Fedora does as well. It's in Red Hat's own interest to do so. I see Bob Young speak on business, not much different than Bill Gates, but unlike Bill Gates, he doesn't screw his own developers. I then see Red Hat's developers and technologists implement a 100% community-focused feature and package set. I'm biased, but I really like Red Hat for the balancing act they are able to come off with. I think we'll see a lot of "repositories" crop up. I chaulk this all up to internal Red Hat developers and technologies proving to the management that the community can better support distribution than RHN. I love it when someone new to a LUG (obviously using Outlook) complained about my ettique of bottom posting and cutting out irrelevant quotes in my response. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 03 October 2003 08:06 am, Paul Gear wrote: Here's my take on this. RH was apparently on two development tracks, RHL and RHEL. Each had a separate code base. I think RHEL was based on RH 7.2, but I could be wrong. In essence you had double the work support two products. That meant a large duplication of effort on the development and test end, including duplicating some staff. They couldn't support both. Creating box sets is peanuts compared to the cost of maintaining two code sets. Mike W - -- Registered Linux - 256979 NRA Life ARS: W0TMW -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

Quoting "Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm(a)redhat.com&gt;: And I understand that.** And I understand that, based on your first statement.** [ **NOTE: Is there any overriding reason RHEL is making the "jump" from 2.1 to 3.0? Are major kernel changes, like NPTL, going into the kernel? I'm just curious. I'm kinda wondering why this is on "2.2" since RHEL hasn't been around for that many versions yet. ] Er, um, that might start causing some issues. I would at least like to see some consistency in the package manager itself. This is probably an area where Red Hat's internal developers should try to "advise" on. Again, it's in Red Hat's own best interest to do so, to keep people buying their RHEL products. And I would never assume such. I'm looking for, more or less, the ability to add basic applications from Fedora to RHEL. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

Quoting "Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm(a)redhat.com&gt;: My ignorance, my apologies. So from a product marketing standpoint, it is just "3". Will Red Hat maintain an internal/technical designation for revisions at least? E.g., 3.x??? <soap box> I know the industry has this "dot-fobia" right now, but I like it _much_better_ than the whole "service pack" nomenclature. But tag it as you will. ;-ppp </soap box> Okay, that would explain the move to 3. I just miss those "good old days" when I could could on the major version to stick with the same GLibC/GCC. I guess that's what we now have in a single 18 month RHEL release, instead of 3 x 6 month RHL releases. Understood. I think NPTL says a lot. As always. ;-ppp At least you don't send out your sales people and have them tell people that they are "engineers." That's the #1 reason why even MCSEs dislike Microsoft. No more than you have done with Rawhide in the past, I know. But if I was Red Hat management, I'd have to believe that by seeing 3rd party packages built to my commercial product, I'd sell more commercial product. But they know Which brings me to the culmination of a point I wanted to bring up before. Does Red Hat see either ... 1) Two tags in Fedora -- one for Fedora, one [subset] for RHEL, or 2) Expecting community software projects to release a RHEL version themselves, all while working with Fedora to release one for Fedora I'm not trying to tell Red Hat what to do. After all, unlike Debian, you have to support what you ship. So that means you're limited in what you can ship. But I think #1 might be in its best interest, from a commercial perspective, to provide a framework for this, to help sell your own RHEL products. Because the problem with #2 is why people prefer Debian, and might not move to Fedora en masse. #2 still means there is no community built around RHEL, which means there is less incentive for the regular user to purchase it (or worse, purchase SuSE Linux Personal/Professional instead). If Red Hat does not consider this a market consideration, then I'd understand (and I'm _not_ deamonizing Red Hat here). But I think other people have hit on it. There needs to be a new "consumer" between the new Fedora "enthusiast" and the RHEL "business" products. So I've suggested that Red Hat consider help supporting a "tag" in Fedora, even if it is a subset, of popular packages for its current RHEL release. That would help Red Hat sell more RHEL WS/ES boxes. I leave it up to Red Hat to decide if the costs of doing such are worth the potential increase in sales of RHEL WS/ES. Right. As long as GLibC/GCC doesn't change, most things are accomodated. And given that RHEL release are supposed to be 18 months apart, this is basically what we had with the 3 x 6 month model of X.0 - X.2+. And I understand that. But I also see that preventing people from buying RHEL, because it is no different than what they had before. Now Red Hat could choose to hope that another party picks up that end, or the Fedora community themselves. But given why Fedora now exists, I want to believe Red Hat might consider "unofficially" (i.e. unsupported) maintaining its own "tag sub-set" of the Fedora repositories that easily build on their current version of RHEL. Do you see where I'm coming from, just a recommendation? FYI, I promise to avoid posting discussions like the above, unless I'm directly supporting a package myself (not likely anytime soon -- as I'm too busy "cert whoring" until probably mid next year, long story ;-). Oh, I guess I should clarify. I'm not expecting Red Hat promise such. It's not feasible for Red Hat to do so. If there is one thing I _know_ of Red Hat, they make small promises and deliver _more_ than most people expect. So that's all I'm hoping for here. The idea here is to _not_ replace anything that RHEL ships. Only _augment_ what is in it. That would make SLA a nightmare for Red Hat, and be self- hindering to support such an effort. Which is why I'm calling it a "tag subset." So if that means you can't run the latest GNOME, or a GNOME app that requires the latest GNOME, that's totally understandable. I think I made that known in the other post. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

Quoting "Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm(a)redhat.com&gt;: Correct. But it does add a small, additional burden for those that do want to release RHEL packages. In fact, it largely benefits Red Hat if they do. that was, more or less, my point. It's hard to know how to accomodate properly. And I don't know the answer either. In fact, I think Red Hat knows better than I can even stab at. To "narrow" my comments, after re-educating myself, I'm largely talking about Fedora "Extras" (not Fedora "Core," "Alternatives" or anything else). And I agree with you. But I want to offer up something. The reason why you didn't see much reason to is that most people didn't see value in moving to RHEL when RHL "did-the-job" -- e.g., supported for 2 years, etc... So they just ran RHL. Now everything changes with Fedora. We now have only RHEL that is being supported 1+ years. So this may drive more people to RHEL WS/ES. If they know they can get most of the "common" software from Fedora "Extras" to run on RHEL, then RHEL WS/ES should ensure even more copies. So I guess I'm talking about a 2nd tag on _only_ Fedora "Extras." Maybe an old throw-back to the separate "Powertools," only now for RHEL. Unsupported by Red Hat, but available. I guess as you mentioned before, there _might_ be some issues with how SLAs are handled, but I still see it as doable. And that's my hope too. It is not only visible, but nothing disturbs me more when other people don't see it. I find I defend Red Hat almost weekly when people don't. It's more of that "hate #1" attitude I see all over the place. E.g., there is plenty of things to complain about Microsoft, but 90% of what I see out of people is just "hate #1" attitude and not a very good argument. [ TheBS sees a beam of light ... ahhh ... ] Hmmm, that's not quite where I was going, but it made me think of something else. Maybe you should ship UML in RHEL and encourage Fedora to accomodate the few details to make sure it works with it. I'm not an UML guru, but this sounds like a possible solution (provided you have the extra memory/resources so your system can handle it)? -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ There is no greater ignorance than the popular American environ- mental movement, which focuses on the most useless details. Be it recycling the world's most renewable resource or refusal to use proven CFC insulation on launch vehicles, no lives will be spared in the further pursuit of, ironically, harming the environment.

What does the $250 for Solaris include? Last I checked they charge extra for C/C++ tools like most other UNIX distributions. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Holden" <dh(a)iucr.org&gt; To: <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>; "Benjamin J. Weiss" <benjamin(a)Weiss.name>; "Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: <fedora-list(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 4:16 AM Subject: Re: Fedora and the System Administrator for True64 my worrying business.

On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 10:08, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: Yes make sure you read the fine print of what is covered by Solaris x86 at 250.00.. it is not as simple and clean as a price difference does. But then again.. it was never really fair to compare a 49.99 installation support only boxed set to a 250.00 commercial support solaris in the first place.. but many linux heads did so. -- Stephen John Smoogen smoogen(a)lanl.gov Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645 Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --