On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 13:47, James J. Ramsey wrote:
> > p.s. - is there gonna be a channel on RHN for
> Fedora Core
> > when the general release is done? I blew $500 of
> > employers money a month ago to buy enterprise
> > for RH9, and it feels like I've wasted the money
> if I can't
> > keep them up on the latest release...
> I know there are Red Hat employees on this list, but
> to save their
> valuable time, and not to assume any kind of mantle,
> I think the answer
> to your question is probably a resounding "no." RHN
> is a paid service
> and RH is pretty smart to conserve their bandwidth
> for their paying
RHN isn't totally a paid service; up through RH 9 a
demo service was allowed (with the "price" being the
filling out of surveys every 60 days). Of course, the
paying customers got more bandwidth.
If there is are no Fedora plans for a Fedora RHN, then
rhn_applet and rhn_register should have not even made
it to the first beta, let alone the third.
First let me say that I got just a little muddled there. I actually use
a Demo account for some RHL 9 boxes I have, also, and that should have
occurred to me as I was writing. Nevertheless, rhn_applet as part of the
overall up2date package isn't only useful for RHN enabled boxes. It
works fine for clients on a local, isolated network I have at work,
where I have to SneakerNet updates to a yum repo I use there; I simply
remove the serverURL value and they get instant up2date goodness.
As for rhn_register, since it also is part of the overall up2date
package, there's no real reason for it to "go away" in FC just because
those folks might not be using it. After all, the FC distro is the basis
for RHEL, and it would take an unnecessary effort to remove it
especially from FC.
Paul W. Frields <paul(a)frields.com>