On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Karl J. Runge wrote:
> Anybody using Redhat 7.1?
We're testing it out on a workstation or two here, and I've installed it on
my workstation at home for kicks.
> Is RH 7.1 working better now?
There do seem to be less bugs out of the box. The install is very slick.
It detects just about everything except your shoe size automatically. It even
probes the monitor for X11 display parameters. I can honestly say this makes
X11 easier to setup than Microsoft Windows. Fairly recent versions of GNOME
and KDE, plus a good supply of applications, make the whole "desktop
experience" a lot nicer. Red Hat 7.1 (along with SuSE 7.1) are serious
challengers to MS-Windows on the desktop front.
One other neat thing was that it offers to setup a complete firewall as part
of the install procedure, and in fact selects that by default. It appears Red
Hat is making a real commitment to security now (about time, too).
> - any upgrading issues/gotchas?
Haven't tried an upgrade from 6.x -> 7.x.
> for you did it break any (non-Redhat-supplied) apps, scripts, etc.
It almost certainly will.
For one, RHS has moved to comply with the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy
Standard). That means file locations have changed for many things. Anything
that assumes XYZ is at a particular location may get confused. However, I see
*this* as a Good Thing in the long run. As for the rest... well, read on:
With RHL 7.1, Red Hat has moved to the 2.4 kernel exclusively. From
everything I've read, the 2.4 kernel is *not* ready for prime time -- the
memory manager has *serious* issues that can cause crashes or system
corruption.
They are still using their "GCC 2.96" compiler, which is based on a
*development snapshot* of GCC. It is not binary compatible with anything else
known to man. Binaries built on RHL 7.x systems will almost certainly not
work anywhere else. The improved language support in this version of GCC has
uncovered many bugs in existing sources, so it may well break source builds
for things that "worked before". Binaries built on other systems have a fair
chance of working on RHL 7.x, *if* you install the compatibility libraries.
(To be completely fair to Red Hat, GCC has a long-standing history of
breaking binary compatibility with previous versions. The real issue is Red
Hat's use of a development snapshot as the default compiler in a supposedly
production release, without even marking it as such.)
Red Hat seems to have a serious problem in the 7.x series with what can be
considered stable, production-quality code. Their customers, myself included,
depend on them to provide a solid distribution. Including cutting-edge stuff
is fine, but it should be clearly marked as such, and it should not be the
default or only option.
I've been a Red Hat fan for a long time, but the 7.0 and 7.1 releases have
really soured me. Hopefully, they will clean up their act for the 8.x series.
Otherwise, their long-term outlook is not so good. One of the main reasons I
prefer Linux is the quality of the code -- software that doesn't suck, as ESR
puts it. Red Hat seems to think they can get away with publishing a
"Microsoft-quality" release. To me, at least, that is unacceptable.
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or |
| organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. |
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
