On Sunday 14 May 2006 12:31 pm, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 01:18, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > > > I can't see any downside to Red Hat offering a sub-$100/annual version > > > of their EL system for home use. Ditch the support options if > > > necessary and just provide updates from RHN. > > > > > > It seems like a lost revenue stream to me. Is there something very > > > basic I'm overlooking? > > > > How would this be better than Fedora? > > The code is better-tested before initial release (mostly coming > from late in a fedora cycle), then supported with updates > for 7 years. For servers this is *much* better because the > server software is mostly feature-complete and you don't > want to have to reinstall them all the time. However, > Centos has pretty much filled this need with their free > rebuild from the source rpms and free update support. > > For desktops you probably have to put up with the fast > fedora release cycle because the desktop and application > software is still evolving rapidly. But it's too bad that > you have to replace working kernel and device driver versions > with new and experimental ones just to get a current version > of evolution, OOo, and firefox. > My desktop machine is partitioned into an FC 5 and a RHEL 4 install. I'm currently trying to get the latest KDE (3.5.2) x86_64 installed correctly via yum 2.4 (the latest version which runs on RHEL w/o upgrading Python) on the RHEL4 installation. Does anyone know of a working repository for this? I can create a repo file for the kde-redhat repository but if barfs continually on missing dependencies. Any pointers or success stories would be appreciated. DP ====================================================== David-Paul Niner, RHCE Orange Park, Florida United States of America http://www.dpniner.name | dpniner@xxxxxxxxxxxx Registered Linux User #217494 Public key and fingerprint for GPG key 1FCE01A2: http://www.dpniner.name/files/gpg/pubkey.asc Free/Busy information published at: https://horde.dpniner.name/kronolith/fb.php?u=dpniner ====================================================== -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
