Re: rpm question...
From: Jean-David Beyer (jdbeyer_at_exit109.com)
Date: 01/09/05
- Next message: mjt: "Re: cdrecord: Bad Option: -iso"
- Previous message: Fred: "Debian on sata drive"
- In reply to: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Next in thread: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Reply: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:26:54 -0500
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> "Jean-David Beyer" <jdbeyer@exit109.com> wrote in message
> news:10u0d5cglnphl3e@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>
>>>"Nico Kadel-Garcia" <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:JqGdnelKLbreUELcRVn-qA@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>><tsiwut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1105172936.675955.50820@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have a *large* repository of rpm updates on an ftp server that i use
>>>>>to update my RedHat ES3 servers after the OS install, I use the command
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>rpm -Uvh ftp://server/path/to/*.rpm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>problem is, the number of rpm files has grown enormously, I am sure a
>>>>>lot of them are not being installed.
>>>>
>>>>ES 3 is out? Good.
>>>
>>>
>>>Excuse me, ES 3 has been out for a while. I've been waiting on ES 4,
>>>which has been slow in arrival.
>>
>>How slow? IIRC, ES3 came out in late 2003. One of the features of the RHEL
>>distributions is their long life. They do not come out with frequent new
>>releases. Their customers want stability, not the latest bells and
>>whistles. Here is part of what they say about it:
>
>
> It's been over a year. The 2.6 kernel is a big deal for server grade
> hardware, especially SMP and drivers for recent devices, and they need to
> move forward with that to provide corporate support. for it.
Red Hat have backported many of the features of the 2.6 kernel into the
RHEL3 distribution. Which features have they omitted that you need? In
addition, they have put features into that kernel that are not even yet in
the 2.6 kernel.
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/kernel26/
> I recognize
> that Fedora Core is where they do their bleeding edge work, and that's just
> fine. But I'm actually suggesting Beowulf users use Fedora Core rather than
> RHEL because of the tardiness of the performance updates for heavy-duty iron
> in RHEL.
>
To which performance updates do you refer?
>
>
>>>Stability
>>>
>>>12-18 month release cycle and seven years of support for every version.
>>>Upgradeability
>>>
>>>Upgrades to new versions are included with every Red Hat Enterprise Linux
>>>subscription.
>
>
> Well, yes. And if the next version isn't out until 18 months or 24 months
> after a major feature change such as the 2.6 kernel, theree's no point in
> ever getting it for new hardware, since any hardware that RHEL will actually
> run on is near the end of its useful life as high end hardware.
>
> 18 months is too damn long for a modern release cycle, and their lack of ISO
> updates makes it a nightmare to install on even slightly more recent
> hardware. I bless to all the heavens the guy doing whiteboxlinux.org, who
> takes RHEL SRPM's and all the updates and cleanly rebundles them. RedHat
> should absolutely hire him to do this for RHEL commercially.
>
>
For users who use their systems to get work done, and depend on products
from other vendors who need time to certify it for any particular release,
the last thing they want is frequent new releases.
-- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 15:20:00 up 9 days, 4:39, 3 users, load average: 4.12, 4.08, 4.07
- Next message: mjt: "Re: cdrecord: Bad Option: -iso"
- Previous message: Fred: "Debian on sata drive"
- In reply to: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Next in thread: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Reply: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: rpm question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
