OSNews

I thought you had to pay for RHEL. Why give away a preview like this?

Is RedHat expecting people like me to QA and recommend their commercial products? Or are they considering changing their EULA and licensing for RHEL?

I would support the product if I could use it like GPL/GNU software. If the EULA says otherwise then I won't support or recommend the product. Its up to RedHat. I'm sure their marketting department can pull in many more profitable sales than my opinion.

I read this article on integerknowledge.com last week. I know the person posting it was the same person but why copy the article... why not just link to it?

Because *he* SENT it to us for publication in the form of an attachment full with screenshots and all! He did not say anything about being published elsewhere!
We have strict rules regarding original longer articles on osnews, only original content is allowed to be published by third party authors. I will be emailing him ASAP. From our article style guide: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=168
"Articles submitted and published on OSNews are not to be re-published elsewhere, except maybe in translation cases to another languages (to be decided on case by case basis)."

It's been published here: http://www.integerknowledge.com/taroon.htm

Yes, I now know. I went to their web site and saw it. I already emailed the author asking for an explanation. He did not tell us anything about this when he sent us the email with the attachment for publication.
It is not too bad though, as the author has the copyright, and he is free to send it for re-publication. If we knew it was published elsewhere we would not post it, but now it is live, plus the guy has the copyright and he can decide where to submit it, so it is not all that bad.

I would support the product if I could use it like GPL/GNU software.

You can use it as GPL/GNU software. All improvements are gpl'ed and available as source as specified by the gpl. They aren't obliged to give binaries. In fact they aren't even obliged to give you the source if you haven't purchased the product, but they do so anyway (isn't that nice :-) )

They aren't obliged to give binaries.

That's why I go out of my way to promote and recommend companies that do. I also offer my developement skills and understanding of *nix systems to help QA their products and recommend changes to make them play nice with corporate networks. I work to get the job done not to make someone rich.

... and I thought SuSE only is so stupid to make a (user-level) distribution with a beta compiler (gcc3.3pre)
RH comes with a f* patched kernel too (ntpl threating)

Looks more like a patched horrorshow than an enterprise ... distribution????


PS: Slack is my fav :-) ... SuSE 8.2 comes next for users desktop!

Yes, I find it also shocking that they use beta software in a release that is clearly labeled as "beta"

if i remember right it has been linked to (from osnews) back then

Do you think its just a _BETA_ thingie? that all those guys who work hard at Red Hat dont do anything with their time?
You pay for features... got it?


RH comes with a f* patched kernel too (ntpl threating)..


Definetly, im running taroon and im having a lot of problems with most applications..
If I boot with other kernel, I cannot get X to work..
Seems they configured X with ntpl support or sth..lots of pain in the a$$..

> Yes, I find it also shocking that they use beta
> software in a release that is clearly labeled as "beta"

Yes, you're right *now*. But I find it shocking that RH will be using this beta software (as in RH9.0) in production too although RH know of this problems (nptl in kernel).
Soon, when RH Enterprise is final you see what's wrong:
ntpl for a 2.4 when it's officially in kernel-2.6 first and gcc-ssa when it's officially in gcc-3.4 first!

Needed software (for me) doesn't work and the software developer states, that I don't should use a f* patched distro.

I think he's (the software developer) right on it's statement!

hi all,

First off, my apologies for all this double submission problem, allow me to explain how it happen and hopefully retain some karma. :-)

I seeked permission when I submitted the article to OSNews.com and my superior knew what I was doing. When the article did not appear (around 28th Aug), my boss asked if it can be published on the company website. I thought I gotten a small rejection, and agreed, thus it appeared on the company website before OSNews.com published it.

In reality, I submitted it first to OSNews.com when I completed it and cleared it with my company legal.

OSNews.com is my favourite website for information, and I have every intention to see it grow and grow!

regards,
boon kiat

Well, this is not entirely true. The article was submitted as a normal submission for the integerknowledge.com site on Aug 27th, so that means that it was up and running there on or before August 27th. I was on vacations so I didn't have any knowledge about its already post on osnews about it: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=4349 as a simple linked story.
We received your email and attachment with the full article on Sunday, 31st of August, not before. And we do not generally post big articles on holidays (this Monday was a holiday in USA) or weekends, only on normal weekdays. This is why your article went live here on Tuesday and not on Sunday for example. But in any rate I received your email after Aug 28th.
A possibility is that your email got stack in the osnews-crew mailing list for authorization just because it was a big email (we do not allow huge attachments) and that it got authorized too late, dunno.

gcc 3.2.3 is the default compiler. We just include gcc-ssa for new Java work that makes Eclipse build as a native application, and new memory debugging funtionality called Mudflap.

We clearly ARE NOT using a beta build of the compiler.

With regard to NPTL, we've done extensive work and the majority of development on this technology. Scalable, sustainable POSIX threads are a demand of the Enterprise market. NPTL has already appeared in Red Hat Linux 9. Yes, there were some bugs at that time which have since been fixed. We're confidant that this is a rock solid implementation for applications which make correct use of POSIX threads. For those applications which depend on specific (broken) behavior of the legacy LinuxThreads POSIX threads implementation, we include this as well with an easy environment variable to switch between the two.

Hi guys can you help me out? I am trying to install Linux tarron beta (AS version) but when I am prompted for the 2nd cd it says that it is not a valid AS cd. I downloaded the images from Red Hat's site. Thanx