Comments on: Redhat 9, go home

By: Ty

Ty — Wed, 01 Sep 2004 00:05:16 +0000

Ive just started using redhat 9, I would say as a debian user redhat 9 sucks ass. I am using yum and apt and they suck. I have no apt-file like in debian (afaik). I apt(ed) apache2 errronously named httpd its missing ap{r,u}config scripts. Php won’t compile as a dso to apache2. My redhat 9 machine is on a managed network. And I will eventually make the time to migrate away from RH9 even though I will have to boot into a rescue system from remote, and upload a whole no filesystem from remote, I think this is a huge pain in the ass but in all reality as hard as compiling php using apt/yum to solve dependicie problems.

YES!
RH9 SuckS!
Ty

By: jammn

jammn — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 05:26:26 +0000

I can only speak for redhat having used it since 6.2.

Versions 6.2, 7.1 and 7.2 are well loved and are still being used as Oracle 8i servers in our company – with very good uptime / performance statistics.

Our redhat 9 desktops (KDE) are running slower than expected. But, to be fair, we have only just started exploring and customising fedora.

Regarding rpm’s – we have not had any (big) problems and use them extensively to deploy patches and inhouse developments.

Installing apt for rmp does help – we use our own perl scripts to handle dependencies.

Further, I can’t help thinking that many experienced problems due to the way information about these issues is publicly available. In my case, maybe these problems have been avoided due to my early trouble getting to know version 6.2 (and the endless nights reading faq,readme’s and obscure redhat sites)
;-)

However, after following the discussion, I’m keen to grab an old box and install Debian.

By: Unknown

Unknown — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:40:21 +0000

fabio IMHO you never used debian….
>”not suitable for a stable client use!”???
I really don’t understand the why…milion of people uses debian, I don’t think iall those people are crazy…

>”the stable branch is too obsolete for desktop use”
ok, in fact it is used expecially for servers.

>”testing doesn’t get updated as it should”
i don’t think you used testing, its application are update every month

>”and unstable is REALLY unstable”
sid is more stable than RH “stable” edition
only few package broken sometimes, but it is made for developers

>”you get hundreds of megabytes of updates only during a week!”
Only if you update every week.

Go back and play with Game Boy, linux is not for you.

By: Fabio Corazza

Fabio Corazza — Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:51:57 +0000

Yes, I know, this post is pretty old but I just can’t stop me behind something of incorrect.

RPMs packages are good, they just need a good tool like apt to manage automatically all dependencies during installing/removing of any.

So, first grab your copy of apt for rpm (apt4rpm.sf.net) and install on Fedora (the new RedHat community-oriented distribution) and see how it goes. It works like a charm, believe me.

I used Debian for years (about 4 consecutively without any other desktop OS in my home client) and I have to say that is a good distro, but not suitable for a stable client use! The stable branch is too obsolete for desktop use, testing doesn’t get updated as it should and unstable is REALLY unstable – you get hundreds of megabytes of updates only during a week!

Fedora well configured + apt is a good choice IMHO.

Sorry for my replying to an old post, maybe I don’t have anything better to do at the moment. :)

Fabio

By: Fabio Corazza

Fabio Corazza — Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:50:30 +0000

Yes, I know, this post is pretty old but I just can’t stop me behind something of incorrect.

RPMs packages are good, they just need a good tool like apt to manage automatically all dependencies during installing/removing of any.

So, first grab your copy of apt for rpm (apt4rpm.sf.net) and install on Fedora (the new RedHat community-oriented distribution) and see how it goes. It works like a charm, believe me.

Fedora well configured + apt is a good choice IMHO.

Sorry for my replying to an old post, maybe I don’t have anything better to do at the moment. :)

Fabio

By: Tom Sommer's weblog

Tom Sommer's weblog — Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:42:59 +0000

Well I have used Windows 2000 for almost 3 years, and Linux Debian for 1 year. It was time for a change.

By: Tom Sommer

Tom Sommer — Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:56:34 +0000

Can’t remember anymore :)

I think it just fucked up my dep.

Redhat is fine without all the GUI and precompiled packages, we use it at Wannafind too. So give me a tarball of source any day instead of .rpm

By: Shawn McMahon

Shawn McMahon — Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:50:04 +0000

I’m curious to know more detail about apt-rpm screwing up your system. I use it on all my RedHat systems, I’ve even used it to apt-get dist-upgrade from RH 7.2 to 7.3 (although I haven’t had the courage to do it from 7.3 to 9 yet).

I work for a Fortune 500 corp, and we use it on hundreds of systems with no problems, but none are RedHat 9.

If there’s a RedHat 9 issue with it, I’d like to know more so we can avoid it.

By: nt

nt — Sat, 04 Oct 2003 08:35:25 +0000

Try Mandrake, it’s a very polished and fast desktop Linux distro, plus it has urpmi which is almost as good as apt, and there are lots of repositories available for Mandrake with lots of packages.

By: Paul Kilroy

Paul Kilroy — Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:44:34 +0000

Have you tried apt-rpm… Very nice.. I’m a converted debian / gentoo user. Redhat is the most up to date (if you point your sources.list at good sites).