Linked by Andrew Case on Thu 11th Nov 2010 22:02 UTC
Red Hat "Red Hat, Inc. today announced the general availability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, the latest major release of the company's flagship operating platform, setting the scene for its server operating systems for the next decade. With Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6, Red Hat defines new standards for commercial open source operating environments. Designed to support today's flexible and varied enterprise architectures, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 delivers the comprehensive foundation customers need for physical, virtualized and cloud deployments."
Order by: Score:
Comment by Terg
by Terg on Fri 12th Nov 2010 03:26 UTC
Terg
Member since:
2010-02-24

Man, I don't like the tone of that article. All hail Linux and all that, but damn

"Yes, we shit golden turds that smell like roses. And you should eat them, because we are awesome"


>_>

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Terg
by orestes on Fri 12th Nov 2010 05:34 UTC in reply to "Comment by Terg"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Typical corporate jargon really. for the typical corporate bobblehead. Not that Red Hat's support hasn't been sterling every time I've dealt with them... just for your average enthusiast user it'd be easier to say "Nothing to see here, move along" till CentOS 6 hits

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Terg
by gilboa on Fri 12th Nov 2010 15:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Terg"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd think twice before putting production machines on CentOS.
E.g. RHEL 5.5 was released on the 30/3 while CentOS 5.5 was released on the 14/5 - a month and a half. As far as I remember, CentOS 3.7 took even longer.

No, I'm no suggesting that CentOS is bad, quite on the contrary, I use it all the time for staging purposes.
I am suggesting that if you're running anything mission critical, and unless you have the man power to port RHEL fixes yourself, consider using RHEL and not CentOS.
The price of RHEL pales in comparison to unscheduled down time.

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Terg
by orestes on Fri 12th Nov 2010 16:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Terg"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd agree completely, if outside support is important to your situation Red Hat's team is one of the best in the industry.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Terg
by linux-it on Fri 12th Nov 2010 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Terg"
linux-it Member since:
2006-07-13

found Novell to do a much better job here _and_ cheaper.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Terg
by gilboa on Sat 13th Nov 2010 18:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Terg"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe and maybe not. Depending on your requirements and your personal taste.

Given the fact that I had kernel issues getting fixed within 24h on RHEL (from bugzilla to download) I find it hard to believe that SLES is even better.

... But as I said, it does boil down to personal experience and preference.

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by Terg
by leech on Sun 14th Nov 2010 04:43 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Terg"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Not to mention that SUSE pretty much sucks.

They've brought some good things to the plate, but I've never had anything but problems with the distribution, though SLES was fairly stable, it was put into place where I now work by the previous admin who did not know what he was doing.

I would much prefer RedHat/CentOS over anything coming out of Novell.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Terg
by CrLf on Sun 14th Nov 2010 11:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Terg"
CrLf Member since:
2006-01-03

This is not really true.

I use both RHEL and CentOS in production and I can say with a high degree of confidence that while CentOS usually takes a while to get in sync when Red Hat does version updates (eg. 5.4->5.5, 5.x->6.0), the normal flow of security updates is usually not that far behind. A RHEL update for some package is usually followed by a CentOS update in 1-2 days (or shorter, as was the case with the recent glibc security updates).

I don't see any reason for not using CentOS in production, especially on machines that aren't running any kind of proprietary "enterprise" software and where management can be confortable on relying only on you for support (not that we *ever* had to call Red Hat for support...).

Reply Score: 2