Re: RedHat 10 wishlist

From: David A. Frantz (wizard_at_eznet.net)
Date: 08/29/03 

Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 14:36:05 -0400

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:33:50 -0700, Keith Clark wrote:

>
>
> "David A. Frantz" wrote:
>
>>
>> Number two on the list is install support for SATA.
>>
>
> That's a kernel function, not a Red Hat issue. I'm sure that when it's
> available in the kernel, it'll be available in a RedHat install.
>
> But why would you care? Serial ATA drives are more expensive with no
> improvement in performance (fast interface does not equal fast performance
> because a hard drive's bottleneck is getting data off of the platters which is
> determined by bit density and rotational speed, not the interface). In addition
> you can only have two Serial-ATA drives per controller where with parallel IDE
> you get 4. So big whoop. Don't fall for marketing hype.
Well considering that Redhat employs a number of kernel hackers I think
they do have some influence on kernel development.

While current performance is not there that will come just as it has with
previous revisions to PATA. But performance is not everything SATA
offers other advantages.

>
>>
>> Number three would be more optimizations for speed, even if some fancy
>> features have to be dropped. It is really about time for them to leave
>> behing the non i686 world of intel processors and come out with a i686
>> distro.
>>
>
> It's trivial to recompile the kernel for whatever processor you're using. For
> what it's worth, I recompiled it from "686" to "Pentium 4" in both my 1.7 GHz
> and 3.2 GHz machine and while it does make a difference, it's not earth
> shattering.
While I agree that compiling just the kernel is not earth shaking as
Redhat has become more bloated any performance advantage you can get is
advantageous. But I was talking about optimizations to the rest of the
distros, especially the command interpeters and such. Such optimizations
can have a very big impact.

>
> Your best bet is to install the Red Hat source RPM for the kernel, then look in
> /usr/src/Linux<version>./configs and grab the most appropriate one for you
> (i686/Athlon/etc) and then customize it in xconfig or menuconfig. You'll find
> that by default the vast majority of the kernel is compiled as modules, so
> un-needed fancy features don't get loaded. You can always choose to not compile
> any modules you'll never be using. It's really painless, just takes a bit of
> looking thought the lists and unchecking what you'll never use.
I'm currently building up a machine, so I will keep these suggestions in
mind. Need to get past a the Serial ATA problem so this is a slooow
build ;).

>
> The same goes what what's on the system. Un-install what you don't use. Use the
> runlevel editor to ensure that stuff you want left on the system but rarely
> use, doesn't get started automatically.
>
> What I'm really saying is : you the user have *choice* that you don't with
> Microsoft or other OSs. So *take ownership* of how your system is configured,
> don't blame RedHat.
I agree that the choice is there. The problem is htat on my old system I
had to abandon most of the new features in RH9 to almost return to the
performance I had with 7.2. This does not speak well of the distro
overall. At the same time with the machine I'm currently building up I
have to struggle to get the modern hardware to work. So we are really
dealing with a two edge sword here.

>
>
>
>>
>> Number 4 would be to wrap in more open source software. I know they don't
>> like to support a great deal of non system stuff but the competition does.
>>
>
> I don't blame them a bit. It's trivial to download and install what you want on
> your own. I don't blame Red Hat just because they don't include Kino or Red
> Carpet or Audacity. It's real simple and comes down to economics. A company has
> to define a baseline of what they can afford to support and still *make money*.
> Just because package XYZ isn't on the OS CD doesn't make it a bad distribution.
>
Yes I agree with this to an extent. On the other hand it does look like
REdhat is to wrap more stuff into its coming workstation release that I
find interesting.
>
>
>>
>> It would be great is Redhat where to develop a terminal emulator along the
>> lines of Hyperterm or similar GIU based systems.
>>
>
> What would be better would be for someone else to develop it and for Red Hat to
> include it on the CD. It's not RedHat's job to be developing terminal
> emulators.
Wel this is where I really have to disagree, at least as to what Redhats
funciton is. I truely look at Redhat as a software development companie.
 As such they should be responsive to customer needs.

>
>
>>
>> USB2 support & Firewire support!
>
> USB2 and Firewire support is there now! I've been using Firewire since the
> RedHat 7.2 days when you had to manually recompile the kernel for it. Firewire
> works by default immediately after an install of Red Hat 9 now.

I was under the impression that USB2 support wasn't there yet. If it is
the case that the kernel supports the standard fully then I stand
corrected.

>
> If you're trying to capture digital video, go to the Kino site and read up on
> what packages to install. It's really trivial these days. You'll probably need
> to install libavc (for camcorder control) and libdv (for digital video capture)
> and you may need to give the /dev/raw node the right permissions to capture
> video as a user, but Firewire most assuredly DOES work in RedHat by default
> (meaning you don't have to compile a custom kernel).
>
> USB 2 support is in the kernel too, and enabled in a default Red Hat
> configuration.
>
> I can't speak to Firewire or USB2 hard drives as I haven't tried that, but I do
> know for a fact that USB2 (EHCI) is in the kernel, usually as a module. Search
> for it on your system (usually under /lib/modules/<kernel
> version>/kernel/drivers/usb/host/
>
> --Keith

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Relevant Pages

  • Re: RedHat 10 wishlist
    ... That's a kernel function, not a Red Hat issue. ... it'll be available in a RedHat install. ... > like to support a great deal of non system stuff but the competition does. ...
    (alt.os.linux.redhat)
  • Re: How does it do it.
    ... > drive, hard drives, audio, and everything worked perfectly. ... > While Redhat update worked, I did all the updates and they always worked. ... > start with as I had only done the RH install and updates, ... > RH 2.4 kernel from sources. ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: FLAME____ Why is the kernel source not included
    ... >>reported plans to exclude the source from the install discs. ... having the kernel source fully available* is not benign, ... if I am to believe others' claims about Redhat ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: why not like linux ?
    ... Red Hat does apply their own modifications to the kernel, but if you install ... I don't have to install or allow Apache just to have FTP. ... You mention RedHat and say the bear no responsibility over the ...
    (microsoft.public.development.device.drivers)
  • Upgrading Kernel kills X ...
    ... I'm running RedHat 9.0 on a Dell Poweredge 1600 server. ... stock install of RedHat 9.0 gives me the 2.4.20-8kernels accordingly. ... Now if I run RedHat's up2date and pull a new kernel from there, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)