Linked by Adam S on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:16 UTC, submitted by Adurbe
SuSE, openSUSE Adurbe was the first of many to submit the news that openSUSE (aka SUSE 10.0 Beta 1) is now available. The roadmap also includes some interesting information.
Order by: Score:
Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Three questions:
1) What's the difference between this SUSE, SUSE Professional, and SUSE Enterprise?
2) How long does SUSE support each release with security patches?
3) How different is SUSE from RedHat?

Reply Score: 0

v RE: Comparison
by Who is That on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:35 UTC in reply to "Comparison"
RE: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:10 UTC in reply to "Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

1.) It's community supported: Novell probably wants to lay people off.
2.) Maybe not? Read the docs.
3.) Very.. RedHat is stable, Suse is bleeding edge. RedHat is very vocally about free code only, Suse less so: RedHat is a bit more political or historically has been.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

1.) It's community supported: Novell probably wants to lay people off.

Just as Fedora Core remains 99.9% the work of people paid by Red Hat, so will SUSE for at least quite a while. If anything, opening up the development process and infrastructure creates more work, not less. I certainly hope nobody sold this to their boss as "let's open up development and the community will do the work for us!" because history shows us that it doesn't work that way. I think they realize there are costs and benefits to this. One benefit is getting a lot more people using and (hopefully eventually hacking on) SUSE, same goal as Fedora.

3.) Very.. RedHat is stable, Suse is bleeding edge.

By what metric? Fedora and SUSE will now have comparable release cycles and probably comparable lifecycles; if anything, odds are that SUSE will be more stable because they're keeping their supported, retail boxed product - which Red Hat dropped. But the truth is, we don't know yet.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Fedora is not RedHat. I don't know why people don't understand that...
Suse is supported. Fedora is not, it happens to get some updates. People use Suse for work, preferably people only use Fedora to hack fedora and test it.
I was looking at the package list for Suse and here's what I noticed:
1.) They tend to use .0 KDE releases. KDE users are aware that in the 3.x.y series y=0 releases tend to be buggy.
2.) The beta is shipping with gtk 2.7. Now, maybe 2.8 is going to be released before suse 10.0; however they'll still be releasing a fresh and major change of GTK as stable. RedHat is using Gtk 2.4.y.
3.) Suse community will be shipping gcc 4.x.
4.) They're shipping Gnome 2.11 in the beta. It looks like Gnome 2.12 will barely beat Suse 10.0 stable.

They're pretty bleeding edge. Not quite as much as fedora: But frankly Fedora is not usable, I've tried 2, 3 and 4. I liked 2. 3 was unusable, and 4 wouldn't install. So far, Fedora 4 is the only distro that hasn't installed on my laptop: Slackware, Fedora 2,3, Kanotix, RHEL3, and 4 have all installed fine.
I'd hate to see Suse Community turn into another Fedora.

I suppose they may have as many people working on it as before. However, TMK the RedHat developers working on Fedora do it of their own accord now and not on the job. Which doesn't bother me, I don't see RedHat or Novell as wrong to run a community distribution: Bandwidth is a wonderful gift ;) .
But yes, they can get this thing wholly on the community. The best reason not to would be that they'd lose control of it and it could quickly become useless to them.

But, from what Novell has done so far I think they're trying to do their own thing which is not, technically speaking, what Suse was doing. They're much more Gnome, they've hired Icaza, etc. So, I'm not sure that they care to have Suse as a product for that much longer. And, if they do want to get rid of it, shifting it to a new owner would be the responsible thing to do.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 19:03 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I'd hate to see Suse Community turn into another Fedora.

Well that is what's happening, except they're hopefully not making a few of the same mistakes that Red Hat made with Fedora. They're not dropping their boxed product, which at least offers limited support, and hopefully means a more stable product. And hopefully SUSE will continue to have a longer security lifecycle. But the fact is we just don't know.

I suppose they may have as many people working on it as before. However, TMK the RedHat developers working on Fedora do it of their own accord now and not on the job.

This just isn't true.

But, from what Novell has done so far I think they're trying to do their own thing which is not, technically speaking, what Suse was doing. They're much more Gnome, they've hired Icaza, etc.

This is just silly, and I'm not going to follow you into yet-another-pointless-desktop-flamefest. I think this move is exactly the parallel to Fedora - they needed a good development base for the future of their SUSE Linux Enterprise Server, just as Red Hat needed a good base for RHEL. There's no real money in low-end retail Linux, so why not open up the product and spread it far and wide, as they've both done. SLES is a solid and profitable product in its own right, but it's also the foundation for Novell Linux Desktop (which like all enterprise desktop Linux solutions so far has been a commercial dud) and, more importantly, Novell Open Enterprise Server - their migration path for Netware and, quite frankly, the product they've bet the company on. The product they bet the company on requires a strong SLES beneath it! I think Novell has done just fine by SUSE so far, and while this has very little to do with their profit center, they've done just fine by both major desktop camps as well.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 20:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

On the desktop. They seem to have invested in Gnome, not KDE. Suse has always been a KDE distro. Maybe they're going to make some of this new stuff available in their KDE too, I don't know, but I'm not trying to start a yet-another-pointless-desktop-flamefest. But thanks for treating me like I'm arguing with you and being rude.
You try to be polite and have a discussion and some people have to try and make you just look like a jerk. Setup an account, and be polite please;
Anonymous (IP: 68.174.9.---).

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 21:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

On the desktop. They seem to have invested in Gnome, not KDE. Suse has always been a KDE distro. Maybe they're going to make some of this new stuff available in their KDE too, I don't know, but I'm not trying to start a yet-another-pointless-desktop-flamefest. But thanks for treating me like I'm arguing with you and being rude.

They have as many KDE developers on the payroll as they ever did. Mono (some portion of which is Gnome-related; i.e. Beagle and so on) and their Gnome efforts (mostly Evolution) are bigger than when Ximian was standalone, but probably not as big as you think. The desktop, as of yet, just isn't a profit center for them (or anyone in the Linux biz). They need SUSE as the basis of their Netware migration strategy, which is where they make their money and where they've bet the company on Linux. If desktop Linux takes off, of any flavor, that's just gravy. The story is similar at Red Hat. Sorry if I jumped down your throat, but this is OSNews, and usually when people start going down this road it's pure trollbait. Speaking of which, we'll probably attract some now...

You try to be polite and have a discussion and some people have to try and make you just look like a jerk. Setup an account, and be polite please;
Anonymous (IP: 68.174.9.---).


I'd prefer not to, as I think it'll encourage me to waste even more time here than I do already. Sorry if you think that's rude.

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: Comparison
by ma_d on Wed 10th Aug 2005 01:51 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Hmmm, I think I actually spend less time. Except on days like today where I have *nothing* to do.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 19:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Fedora is not RedHat. I don't know why people don't understand that...
Suse is supported. Fedora is not, it happens to get some updates. People use Suse for work, preferably people only use Fedora to hack fedora and test it.


As I said in my follow-up post, since the person said "Red Hat" I wasn't sure if they meant RHEL or Fedora.

As for SUSE vs. Fedora... Just how stable SUSE is now going to be, we just don't know. We're both hopeful, but hope and $4.75 gets you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Compare these two charts, one from Novell explaining the differences between SLP and SLES (this long pre-dates the openSUSE move), and one from Red Hat explaining the differences between Fedora and RHEL. They're more alike than you might think. Notice that Novell shows security support as "limited" and offers no lifecycle guarantee. While in practice, SLP has been a much more stable product, and we hope this will remain unchanged since they plan to keep the boxed product, the truth is nobody really knows yet. We don't even know how long the lifecycle is yet (security patch lifetime).

http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/comparative.html

http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 20:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

True, we don't know. But we can politely discuss speculations and determine a likely outcome ;) .
BTW. I have a "policy" of RedHat means RHEL and Fedora means Fedora. So if someone says RedHat, I never think Fedora. They're very different now.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

3.) Very.. RedHat is stable, Suse is bleeding edge.

Replying again. Perhaps you mean RHEL, if so you're quite correct. The comparable Novell product is SUSE Linux Enterprise Server.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

No it's not. RHEL is a full solution:
RHEL Desktop
RHEL Workstation
RHEL AS
RHEL ES

I've used worksation as such and I can tell you it's a dream for it. It does suck as a desktop though; the lack of media support.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 19:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

No it's not. RHEL is a full solution:

Sigh. Do to the various Novell enterprise flavors, like SUSE Linux Enterprise Server, Novell Linux Desktop, and Novell Open Enterprise Server line up one-to-one with the various products in the RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) line? No. But are they comparable? Of course they are. These are the two companies' enterprise Linux solutions, with longer release cycles, longer lifecycles, enterprise certifications, enterprise features, commercial support contracts, training, etc.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Wed 10th Aug 2005 03:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Its not the beta, it is Suse Pro 9.3 32-bit ;)

But I'll give it a shot.

Reply Score: 0

chameleon
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:34 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I inmediedly ripped the chameleon wallpaper via sftp:-)

Reply Score: 0

RE: chameleon
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 21:02 UTC in reply to "chameleon"
Anonymous Member since:
---

"chameleon wallpaper" how and where did you download it ? thx ;)

Reply Score: 0

re:Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:35 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Good one,as i see it OpenSuSE is the roadmap to stable,and stable being either SuSE Pro or Enterprise.

Reply Score: 0

So...
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:51 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

openSUSE is a beta?

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Comparison
by Dark_Knight on Tue 9th Aug 2005 15:58 UTC
Dark_Knight
Member since:
2005-07-10

Three questions:

1) What's the difference between this SUSE, SUSE Professional, and SUSE Enterprise?

Novell Linux Desktop: The distribution is packaged specifically for the enterprise environment with the basics in mind. For example less applications when compared to SuSE Linux Professional. The distribution is based on an version of SUSE Linux so it's not bleeding edge like SuSE Linux Professional. Also the support offerings are more extensive.

SUSE Linux Professional: Intended for Home, SOHO or developer. The product can be used for client desktop or server and comes with over 2000 applications. Packaged both with 32-bit and 64-bit OS with compiled software that is bleeding edge at time of release. Technical support included with the package is less than what is offered at the Enterprise level though Pay Per Incident support is offered for all Novell distributions. It's by far the most user friendly distribution to transition from Windows to Linux.

OpenSUSE: Testing releases like Fedora Linux where the product is released to the public for free so as to assist with working out bugs prior to the code being implemented in a final release for SuSE Linux Professional and Novell Linux Desktop. This speeds up developement and ensures more feedback from programmers as well consumers on what should be implemented in the final release. Before this was limited to inhouse testing.

2) How long does SUSE support each release with security patches?

Minimum 2 years for SLP and if I recall correctly it's 5 years for NLD. Though YaST allows adding of external servers to update packages if necessary. You can also add Apt4RPM as a package frontend though I haven't needed it.

3) How different is SUSE from RedHat?

Easier to use, both support RPM and use same Linux commands in the Terminal though the Terminal is less used in SUSE Linux. Both are LSB 3.0 certified and are the two leading competitors for the enterprise sector. I've noticed when it comes to cost for support and what's offered in the package that Novell is more competitive. For example Novell packages SLP with both 32-bit and 64-bit OS where as Red Hat charges seperately for each. I've also had better Plug & Play hardware support with SLP than RHEL which may be due either to Novell tweaking the kernel or SLP just being really well designed.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

OpenSUSE: Testing releases like Fedora Linux...

This is not quite correct. The software coming out of openSUSE will be SUSE Linux. The very same release, with limited tech support and probably some add-ons, will continue to be sold in a boxed version as SUSE Linux Professional.

SUSE Linux: Comparable to Fedora, but quite possibly more stable because the same version will be sold in a boxed release with support.

SUSE Linux Professional: Said boxed release. Same exact release as SUSE Linux available through openSUSE for free download. Probably will include additional proprietary software. Limited tech support, no enterprise certifications, but fine for home and SOHO use. The product has been sold in this fashion since the Novell takeover, they're not changing the level of support.

SUSE Linux Enterprise Server: Comparable to Red Hat Enterprise Linux. More stable, more support, enterprise certifications, longer release cycle, no free downloads.

Novell Linux Desktop: Comparable to the Red Hat Desktop flavor of RHEL. Designed for enterprise desktops.

Novell Open Enterprise Server: Novell's migration path for Netware users. A suite of software that can run on top of Netware or SLES, both included.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Replying to myself here, should make clear that we don't know if the boxed version will continue to be called SUSE Linux Professional. Others speculate it will just be called SUSE Linux. So we can call it SUSE Linux (in a box). ;) But we know the support options and level will remain the same. The openSUSE site and comments at LinuxWorld don't clarify this point.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Comparison
by binarycrusader on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comparison"
binarycrusader Member since:
2005-07-06

3) How different is SUSE from RedHat?

Easier to use, both support RPM and use same Linux commands in the Terminal though the Terminal is less used in SUSE Linux. Both are LSB 3.0 certified and are the two leading competitors for the enterprise sector. I've noticed when it comes to cost for support and what's offered in the package that Novell is more competitive. For example Novell packages SLP with both 32-bit and 64-bit OS where as Red Hat charges seperately for each. I've also had better Plug & Play hardware support with SLP than RHEL which may be due either to Novell tweaking the kernel or SLP just being really well designed.


To provide an alternative view, I would disagree with the above. In my experience RHEL is easier to use than SuSE, and has less problems. I've had all kinds of bizarre issues with every single version of SuSE I've tried on multiple systems. Never have I had those *same* issues with RHEL.

So, as always, it's best to try things out for yourself and decide. Some distributions work better for one person and not well at all for another.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comparison
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Yea, but Suse is trying harder for ease of use. But their bleeding edge software choices always get in their way.

Reply Score: 1

v SuSE dies a Fedora death.
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:02 UTC
openSUSE cool
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:05 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Very neat to get to try out a SUSE beta, I really enjoy this distro, and is the one my faimly members use. They love it!

Reply Score: 0

open
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:06 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

so if this is honestly open why dont fedora and opensuse merge.... become one... this would create the biggest single rock since the earth was created...

they are aimming at the same markets...

just playing with the devil.....

Reply Score: 0

RE: open
by dagw on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:51 UTC in reply to "open"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

Well either they would become as successful as you predict or the two teams will bicker and debate endlessly over how exactly the merging should happen and what overlapping technology should be dropped and no real work will get done for 6 month until 3 or 4 forks develop and people get back to coding on those

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:09 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I think OpenSuse i basically the development branch of Suse Professional. In the past Suse has not been open with theit development, that is the source code was available, but in terms of community participation in the development of Suse Professional, well there was none. OpenSuse aims to be what Fedora is to Redhat.

I will follow this, i haven't been a great fan of Suse (I guess it is because i prefer Gnome over KDE [no religious wars please just a preference] and the Debian package management), but it will be interresting to see if more active involvement from the community. I just might just give it a try in the future again, especially because the distribution originates in my home are ;-)

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Comparison
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Comparison"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Hi friend

I also prefer APT and Debian, but to be honest SUSE has a very good implementation of apt4rpm.
And also for the sake of honesty, 9.3 has a nice Gnome 2.10, so nice that it even satisfied James Ogley.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comparison
by Anonymous on Wed 10th Aug 2005 06:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comparison"
Anonymous Member since:
---

That may change because apt4rpm is no longer maintained unless there are users willing to continue to maintain it. The author switched to smartpm.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Comparison
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 10th Aug 2005 08:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comparison"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"That may change because apt4rpm is no longer maintained unless there are users willing to continue to maintain it."

Richard Bos not only maintains it, but has improved it a lot.

Reply Score: 1

10.0
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:13 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Strange. I thought they would wait for KDE 4.0 before going from 9.X to 10.X

Reply Score: 0

RE: 10.0
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:09 UTC in reply to "10.0"
Anonymous Member since:
---

gcc4 is the major deal here/causing the incompatiblity and therewith causing the version number.

Reply Score: 0

v Novell/SuSe doing a great job
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:15 UTC
RE: Novell/SuSe doing a great job
by Filip on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:37 UTC in reply to "Novell/SuSe doing a great job"
Filip Member since:
2005-07-06

Of course that would require Ballmer to throw Gates in an oddly deep pit in Redmond...

Reply Score: 1

It looks as if...
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:21 UTC
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

It looks as if it is going to be an immensely popular project.
It took me several attempts before I could download the torrent, a 215 kb file!

I expect SUSE going up quite a few positions at Distrowatch: today on a monthly basis it is already third.

SUSE stands in a very good position to be the leader as the desktop distro: it is backed by a large company like Novell, it comes packed with apps, it has a large community of motivated developers, it is on the bleeding edge (9.3 has KDE 3.4.2 available) and it is not hindered by funny ideas like clubs, poor organization and so on.

Reply Score: 2

re: anonymous penguin
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:41 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

The problem with APT is that it does not support signatures. When running apt, you download and install packages at your own risk. There is nothing to verify that you are getting what you think you are getting. On the other hand, when using YUM, you have to always import the public key for the repository before being able to install anything. It makes things far more secure and reliable.

Reply Score: 0

RE: re: anonymous penguin
by Nemesis11 on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:47 UTC in reply to "re: anonymous penguin"
Nemesis11 Member since:
2005-07-12

That is not true with apt 0.6

Reply Score: 1

RE: re: anonymous penguin
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:57 UTC in reply to "re: anonymous penguin"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"The problem with APT is that it does not support signatures"

Yes it does. In Debian it is only a recent feature, but in SUSE it has been doing so for a long time.

Reply Score: 1

A "bad thing"? I don't think so...
by markjensen on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:43 UTC
markjensen
Member since:
2005-07-26

It is strange to see comments of how this is such a negative thing, and that SUSE is 'going down the toilet' here and in other forums.

To me, I see a company promoting their product on a commercial level for corporations, and also a renewed push for home/hobby users by making their OpenSUSE easier for people to get. SUSE has always been a 'different' distro to install, with the preferred method having been using a small boot disk, then FTPing in all the rest. Was that a 'bad' way? No. But it was different enough that people new to Linux (much of SUSE's target market, as they are an easy-to-use distro) would try a Mandrake or Red Hat (now Mandriva and Fedora) to try for their first distro.

Their redoubling of effort to promote (magazine inserts and so forth) is a good thing, and allows them to have a public version that consumes less resources for them to maintain, and their corporate version that leverages off of the OpenSUSE development.

I don't know how effective this is, in the big picture. Red Hat still puts a majority of the work into Fedora. But I assume there must be some benefit to businesses like Red Hat and Novell in this newer development method, or Red Hat would have abandoned it, and Novell would not be following suit.

Reply Score: 3

21st century linux?
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:54 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Maybe Linux will evolve into the 21st century with Novell and SUSE.
My ideal Linux distro:
- 1 CD (less than 250 MiB)
- Gobo linux style file system hierarchy ( http://gobolinux.org/ )
- YaST
- Only base KDE/base gnome
- base system (system binaries)
- No ther applications (exactly, don't need 10 text editors,
5 databases, 20 audio players, etc.)
- All programs are provided by their developers directly via
Autopackage ( http://autopackage.org/ )

My next computer will be a Mactel.

Reply Score: 2

RE: 21st century linux?
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:16 UTC in reply to "21st century linux?"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Thank God the people working on things don't think like you.
GoboLinux layouts are anathema. The usr, lib, bin, share and multiple $PREFIX layout is wonderful.
We like having tons of software, but their are many which rely on network software and not cd: Debian (has an 80MB installer, or a 3MB floppy installer), Arch, Gentoo, etc.
Installing just kdebase would be awfully silly... Why even have KDE without the apps? And I'm not sure how gnome breaks up, but most distributors cut some Gnome apps like epiphany.
Autopackage is great. But it's far too young and untested to be so trusted right now as to use it as your central package manager: For one, it screws up zsh everytime it installs a package.

Have fun on the Mac. Don't come running back when you notice they inherit $PREFIX plus their own .app ;) .

Reply Score: 1

Some people don't read well...
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 16:59 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I think alot of the "DOWN THE TOILET" comments come from poepel who just don't read very thoroughly..SUSE Pro as we all know it, ISNT GOING ANYWHERE!!!...as previously stated, openSUSE is just a way to get the community involved with the development process..openSUSE is the road to SUSE Pro, now the community has access to the devel as well as a final release product..SUSE Pro will still be packaged and supported as its always been..they didnt delete SUSE and create openSUSE, they just added a new branch...get a grip folks IMO only goo things can come of this, and it's a step in the right direction for novell if they want to get the community pushing their product..

Reply Score: 0

Way to go!
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:00 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Good to seen SuSe finally open up the development of SuSe Linux.

Fedora maybe the open model for Red Hat Enterprise, but Red Hat leaves you out in the cold for a low cost retail version.

At least with SuSe Professional, you will still see it packaged in retails stores like Best Buy. And it will be affordable compared to the enterprise version.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Way to go!
by Anonymous Penguin on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:10 UTC in reply to "Way to go!"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Red Hat leaves you out in the cold for a low cost retail version."

Good point. Fedora isn't bad, but I don't see myself using it as my desktop OS, because of various reasons.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comparison
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:04 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

1) There will be only a SUSE release, nothing "Professional" anymore. SUSE Enterprise Server is for business users.

2) For "SUSE" releases there are security patches provided for two years, business products have a longer maintenance (iirc five years).

3) Much enough that you should try it: better administration/configuration tools, better KDE support, and more

Reply Score: 1

RE: So...
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:07 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

openSUSE is open development of SUSE Linux. There is no "openSUSE beta" but a "SUSE 10.0 Beta".

Reply Score: 0

Awesome
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:18 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Can't wait, SuSE's polish and attention to detail has always grabbed my attention.

Now if only it would work on my

Athlon XP 1800
Abit KR7A-RAID
GF 3 Ti 200
Audigy
1 GB Ram
17" LCD

I'd be in business ;)

Oh well, that box is going to the folks for XP Home usage... I hope that in the future I can check out SuSE on new box.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Awesome
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:19 UTC in reply to "Awesome"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

What doesn't work? Your chipset has been supported forever; possibly before its iteration was even released. Nvidia supports your card. Audigy's aren't fully supported, but TMK most of it works (not that you could get the games to make full use of it anyway).
And don't say it's your RAID...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Awesome
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Awesome"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Well, it all installs, but when I choose to boot SuSE from the bootloader (which I can do fine) after that point my screen stops operating and I'm not sure how to fix it.

Like, my LCD just goes blank / standby, even though the SuSE installer etc all works fine.

Any advice?

I would like a solution, since I like SuSE from previous times trying it. I'll be using this same LCD (its a pretty nice 17" 1280x1024 Samsung SyncMaster 710T) when I build my next Athlon 64 box... would be nice to have SUSE working on that ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Awesome
by ma_d on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Awesome"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Try this.
Let it go for 3 minutes (plenty of bootup time, even with a network problem).
Hit ctl+alt+f1. See if you get a console login. It may be loading an X based boot screen that's at a resolution your monitor doesn't support. If that's true it should still work fine and you can try to fix it once you get a login.

Otherwise. Go ask in their forums. This is what beta's are for.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Awesome
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 10th Aug 2005 01:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Awesome"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

You could try also the following:

1)Ctrl+Alt+F1
2)init 3
3)sax2

And see if you can get a working X configuration

Reply Score: 1

Release notes
by h0lden on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:43 UTC
h0lden
Member since:
2005-07-27

Could someone tell me about versions of main components (kernel, kde, gnome, gcc etc.)? I can't find any release notes on opensuse.org.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Release notes
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 18:16 UTC in reply to "Release notes"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Could someone tell me about versions of main components (kernel, kde, gnome, gcc etc.)? I can't find any release notes on opensuse.org.

Distrowatch lists the package versions for 10.0 beta 1:
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse

It's pretty much what you'd expect from a product with a 6 month release cycle. Everything very bleeding edge, much like Fedora.

Reply Score: 1

Apt signatures ain't recent, buddy...
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

apt .6 is up to its 40th revision. It ain't recent.
Just recently hit unstable, maybe.

Reply Score: 0

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Just recently hit unstable, maybe."

Yes OK, that is what I mean. I don't fetch much stuff from experimental.

Reply Score: 1

Real Question
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 17:54 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

The real question is how long will Novell support each release with security patches? Currently they support SLP for approximately 2 years. That's reasonable for a fast-moving product, and even more reasonable when upgrades are free (as they now will be). But we don't know for sure. Even for SLP 9.3, Novell's website calls security support "limited" and offers no lifecycle guarantee.

Here's the Fedora vs. SUSE rundown as of right now...

SECURITY PATCH SUPPORT (lifecycle)
Fedora: Approximately 1 year (10 months has been the shortest so far), with non-affiliated Fedora Legacy support possible beyond that.
SUSE: 2 years, if they keep to the current SLP policy.

RELEASE CYCLE
Fedora: 4-6 months
SUSE: 6 months

STABILITY
Fedora: Most agree has been lower than the standard set previously by the old Red Hat Linux boxed product.
SUSE: Because they intend to keep the boxed product, one hopes that stability won't suffer - but we'll see.

SUPPORT (commercial support)
Fedora: None offered by Red Hat.
SUSE: Since the boxed product will continue, the same limited technical support and incident support will continue. But this is not an enterprise product and I wouldn't expect it to be supported as such.

Reply Score: 0

looks good
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 20:04 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

looking forward to it.

Reply Score: 0

hope this not a repeat/clone of fedora core
by pravda on Tue 9th Aug 2005 20:10 UTC
pravda
Member since:
2005-07-06

Fedora Core exists just as one massive beta test platform for RH's Enterprise products.

I was hoping OpenSuSE would be the "open" version of real SuSE Linux, not another giant betaware platform.

From what I've read here from various people, it looks like another "marginal value" offering to the Linux community.

In a way it is a testament that to protect the commercial products, they are not open sourced. That tells me that the "services model" of the GPL is a sham.

Reply Score: 1

registering
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 20:57 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

He ...
You have to register to access the forum ? Really Bad !

Reply Score: 0

RE: RE: chameleon
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 21:09 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Maybe he/she was talking about one of these?:
http://www.opensuse.org/index.php/Artwork_and_Extras

Reply Score: 1

Quick distro question
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE: RE: chameleon"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I know this is the wrong place to ask this, and its unrelated, but, well, I'll ask anyway, you can always ignore me ;)

After spending some time away from linux, I'm about to return to the fold and install it on my laptop. In the past I've run gentoo and ubuntu, I was thinking perhaps of returning with suse. When making my choice, but I really want it not only speed, reliability, etc, which most distros offer now to be honest, I want easy upgradeability. I know gentoo offered this, you can install once and then upgrade forever (almost). However I got fed up of compiling all weekend on my little laptop. Is SUSE upgradable, or if I install 9.3 will I have to reinstall 10.0 when it comes along? If so, are there any other options I should look at? I'm not a linux genius btw, but I know my way around a little.

BTW I do not want a distro versus distro flame discussion, I am just interested in which distros offer upgradabilty rather than focusing reinstalls at every release.

Thanks!

Reply Score: 0

RE: Quick distro question
by Anonymous on Wed 10th Aug 2005 01:38 UTC in reply to "Quick distro question"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Upgradeability question.

In my experience, apt-get'equipped systems very easily traverse the minor version number upgrades.

Debian is well known for that with "apt-get distupgrade" My distro of choice - Slackware - also upgraded almost flawlessly from 10.0 to 10.1 10.current (soon to be 10.2) with "slapt-get -distupgrade"

* "almost" - "bad to correct xorg.conf for "keyboard > kbd" switch.

Major point release upgrades often brake on me though.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Quick distro question
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 10th Aug 2005 01:45 UTC in reply to "Quick distro question"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Is SUSE upgradable, or if I install 9.3 will I have to reinstall 10.0 when it comes along? If so, are there any other options I should look at?"

The answer is "yes and no"

If you haven't installed a lot of third part apps, it should always be possible to upgrade SUSE without reinstalling.

If you want something you can keep upgrading forever, the only other solution except for Gentoo is Debian and *compatible* derivatives. Now in my experience the only truly compatible derivatives are Libranet (the latest release costs money, $89, but not the previous one) and Kanotix.

Reply Score: 1

Re: Quick distro question
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 22:06 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

You may:

1) Download the new version of Suse (let's say 10.0) and burn the ISO images. Then insert the first CD as if you were going to install. It will then ask you whether you want a clean install or an update. Just select update and it will take a look at which packages you have and update them

2) Download the mini-ISO image and basically perform as in #1 but installing by FTP.

Reply Score: 0

Ubuntu competition
by Rogee on Tue 9th Aug 2005 23:27 UTC
Rogee
Member since:
2005-07-07

Everyone is talking about how openSUSE compares to Fedora, and I can definitely see why.

But after reading the Project Overview page, it seems to me that they're also aiming for the Ubuntu market: "Promoting the use of Linux everywhere, openSUSE.org provides free, easy access to the world's most usable Linux distribution, SUSE Linux".

What do you guys think?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ubuntu competition
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 10th Aug 2005 01:56 UTC in reply to "Ubuntu competition"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"But after reading the Project Overview page, it seems to me that they're also aiming for the Ubuntu market"

I don't believe they are doing that on purpose: they are much older than Ubuntu, do you remember?
But an unwanted consequence is that they could take over many Ubuntu users anyway. Just give those people a chance to try a very mature desktop OS like SUSE.
To be said on a side note that openSUSE is proving so poular that I had an hard time downloading the torrent, a 215 kb file!

Reply Score: 1

why
by Anonymous on Tue 9th Aug 2005 23:39 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

If it's not used in business why learn it or keep using it?

Reply Score: 0

Kr0nyk
Member since:
2005-07-31

SuSE and gets some of the issues that people talk about occur in the distro. I'm all for anything that makes a great Linux distro better that it already was.

Reply Score: 1

I don't like any cd-based distros
by Anonymous on Wed 10th Aug 2005 15:11 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

They are all a pain to upgrade. We are using SuSE Pro 9.2 at work on a couple of servers. Not my choice. I already had Debian running on about 8 servers. What I don't like with SuSE is the fact I can't upgrade to a newer release of Apache or Subversion using YaST. SuSE has the newer updates for 9.2 on their FTP site but in order to get them, I have to manually install them.

Otherwise, SuSE expects me to upgrade to 9.3 in order to get newer versions of certain apps. Not something I really want to do on a production server.

Reply Score: 0

Saem Member since:
2005-07-06

Um... I hope it's just a matter of not having the time to investigate the matter, your comment seems to hint at a serious issue with ignorance.

If there are upgrades on the FTP, you will more than likely be able to added it with as a YaST source and then use that to upgrade it, should work fine.

Also, it's arguably a good thing the way SuSE does it, since they're testing the SYSTEM for you. The distro is actually tested more as a whole system, rather than a set of applications. With debian, testing is far more spotty.

Reply Score: 1