RedHat Enterprise Linux

[adler at bnl.gov (Stephen Adler)]

For all those who are looking at other distros, I do suggest
you give Fedora Core 1 a shot. It was the cleanest installation
of red hat yet (opppsss fedora..) and it really does run faster
than red hat 9. (i.e. my windows pop up quicker, its just a
snappier environment.)

The real issue for me are the updates which Red Hat announced
through their red hat network system. up2date seems to work
from a fedora.redhatsomething.com but I don't have that fuzzy
feeling anymore that I can just wait for my red hat network
alert icon in my gnome panel to turn red when there is a critical
update waiting to be downloaded and rpm-installed on my system.

Does anyone know or have some comments on how Fedora users are
supposed to deal with the updates? I've heard stuff about yum,
but I'm not familiar with it.

Cheers. Steve.

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 06:23, Gregory Boyce wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 05:04, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 20:17, Bill Horne wrote:
> > > TWIMC,
> > > 
> > > The "Industrial" version of RedHat, called "Enterprise Linux", is being
> > > distributed on a subscription basis for prices starting at $179/year.
> > > 
> > > I don't approve of RedHat putting Linux into a proprietary model, but
> > > the company has honored the GPL, and has put the source code on its FTP
> > > server.
> > > 
> > > I suggest we (those of us agonizing over what to do when RH9 is dropped)
> > > compile the software and distribute it as a BLU linux varient.
> > 
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22White%20Box%20Enterprise%20Linux%22
> 
> Well, that changes my plans for the day.  Now I get a new distro to play
> with today rather than spending the day rebuilding RHEL packages.
> 
> Now to see if his work fits what I'm looking for.  At the very least,
> this proves it can be done, and gives some pointers.
> 
> Thanks!
-- 
Stephen Adler <adler at bnl.gov>