I know you guys have probably been pretty much fending off the naysayers
for the last couple of days who are predicting doom on Red Hat. I will
admit I dont agree with the route Red Hat has taken but I am going to give
Fedora Core a fair chance and I am not going to jump the gun and immediate
start suggesting SuSE Linux to my clients. I have a couple of questions
that I would like to have answered and if no one on the list can answer
these questions can someone please pass them along to a Red Hat associate.
1. Will Red Hat be extending the EOL for any of its older products such
as RH 7.x and 8.x and will they allow any further renewal subscriptions to
services for these older products?
2. Will Red Hat make boxed versions available of Fedora Core through the
online store or is there a plan to get a third party retail firm behind
3. Will Red Hat extend any kind of service agreements to users of Fedora
Core in a production environment who are subscribed to the RHEL services?
4. Has anyone heard or talked to Sun about the status of Java support
extending to Fedora Core as they do through Red Hat 8.x and 9.x?
5. What will be the status of NVidia driver support for Fedora Core?
Most of my clients need Java and the NVidia or ATI support and they do not
wish to subscribe to RHEL, most of them have inside Linux techs who do
most of the updates for them or for anything really intensive they call me
and my company.
If you wish to contact me privately you may
To view my Linux help page and howto's goto
I have information on x86 Linux and PowerPC Linux
I don't want this to come off as some dopey cheerleading. But I'm just
happy Red Hat decided that forking the former RHL into commercial and
open-source entities was worth their time. They could just as easily
have picked up their ball and gone to court the enterprise crowd. But
they didn't. And that says everything to me.
Just wondering if any efforts were being made to address the Inspiron's problems with ACPI, DSDT, etc... there are several sites showing the difficulties faced by i8500 owners and RH9... just hoping Fedora will address some of these before the official release...
Robert Brimhall (rbrimhal(a)bellsouth.net)
I am glad to see that some people have gotten the latest beta to install.
I have not had good luck with many beta releases.
Severn would not install.
Fedora would not install.
I tried GUI, text, and noprobe.
The text and GUI failed before getting the first install dialog.
The noprobe could not see the CD once it got the first dialog asking how to install even though the CD booted fine.
I purchases a new P4 2.8 and it runs RHES 2.1 Update 2 fine.
I installed the RHES 3.0 beta and it has problems.
It did install though.
Hopefully the Fedora release will work.
Not sure why beta versions and release versions are so different.
Are the beta versions released with debugging turned on in all packages and that break things depending on the system?
I will try it on another system next week and see what happens.
I have joined the Fedora list to see more about it but I claim this
whole move is consistent with a point I expressed long ago. One can't
make money on something you give away free. VALinux learned this as
did other Linux producers.
I was one of those who had so much confidence in RedHat I bought their
stock when it was released. After 1 month or so my loses were about
To me Fedora comes from a decision by RedHat to make money not just
coast along. Under this new arrangement this is what they will do.
It will be pain for some but is no great surprise. Enterprise Software
is where its at, money-wise.
If some third party constructs a pseudo-RH Linux release for sale it
seems to me they will not have to give it away free or allow it to be
down-loadable. Again there is money to be made.
715 Stadium Dr.
San Antonio, TX 78212-7200
Shrike-list mailing list
Fedora 0.93 installed fine. However, when I install the 0.94 to the
same machine, it displays the following message during system boot up.
I media-checked 3 disc and they are passed.
Running anaconda, the Fedora Core system installer - please wait ...
'import site' failed: use -v for traceback
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/anaconda/isys.py", line 22, in ?
from rhpl.log import log
ImportError: No module named rhpl.log
install exited abnormally
sending termination signals...done
sending kill signals...done
you may safety reboot your system
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 12:58, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Ok I lets just cut to the chase.. what is the price people are willing
> to pay and how many machines are you going to have? Then figure out how
> many others you would need to sell at that price for RH to become
> profitable and grow (going off of SEC filings or whatnot).
Okay, I'll take a stab at this, but I'm only one person so I'm not sure
my comments will be representative of other universities. Let's say that
hypothetically we'd like to have/support 100 machines. We're probably not going
to replace them all in one year so the cyclical cost of $180 each time we
replace a machine is probably manageable. However, paying $180 (minimum... more
if you want support) per machine, per year would come out to $18000 per year.
That is simply out of the question. We need some sort of volume discounts to
be able to cover the maintenance costs. Let's say for argument's sake that we
could handle somewhere in the $2000 - $4000 range for "maintenance" costs each
year (ideally that would include support). However, let's say Linux
popularity grew and we grow to 200 machines. Should the cost double
($4000 - $8000)? I don't believe so. I could be wrong here, but I
don't believe RedHat's cost linearly increase as the number of machines
at a site increases. My point is that there should be some sort of
volume pricing (at least for maintenance/support costs). For example, $x for
0-100 machines, $y for 100-500, $z for greater than 500. We simply can't afford
per seat licensing for a large number of machines.