Which Redhat?

I have Slackware Linux with Apache & Tomcat serving as a Web server
and Gateway for a small home based business. I want to switch to
Redhat.

Which Redhat should I use?
Is the workstation version adequate?

Not too busy a web site plus I don't need to buy a whole lot of tech
support which seems to come with the more expensive versions of
Redhat.

In comp.os.linux.networking Mike <(E-Mail Removed)>:

> I have Slackware Linux with Apache & Tomcat serving as a Web server
> and Gateway for a small home based business. I want to switch to
> Redhat.

The question is why? If Slackware works for you, why not keep it?

There are some reasons for running one of those $$ enterprise
versions:

- You want/need the support

- You need to run some $$ app which is only certified on one of
those distro

- Your hardware vendor requires you to run it to get support

- You want/need the 5 years patches availability, as you simply
can't upgrade the massive amount of systems every one/two
years in your data centers.

- More I didn't thought of while typing.

> Which Redhat should I use?
> Is the workstation version adequate?

It misses IIRC some server packages, likely tomcat is among them.

> Not too busy a web site plus I don't need to buy a whole lot of tech
> support which seems to come with the more expensive versions of
> Redhat.

You could use then http://whiteboxlinux.org/, which is more or
less exactly redhat enterprise without payed support, or one of
the other clones available.

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo (E-Mail Removed) | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 38: secretary plugged hairdryer into UPS

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:04:25 GMT, Mike
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> I have Slackware Linux with Apache & Tomcat serving as a Web server
> and Gateway for a small home based business. I want to switch to
> Redhat.
>
> Which Redhat should I use?
> Is the workstation version adequate?
>
> Not too busy a web site plus I don't need to buy a whole lot of tech
> support which seems to come with the more expensive versions of
> Redhat.

Why do you want to switch from Slackware? If you don't need expensive
tech support, Fedora might be what you want.


--
New motto at CBS and NBC: "Jesus didn't turn away people, but we do."

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 18:56:24 +0100, Michael Heiming
<michael+(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In comp.os.linux.networking Mike <(E-Mail Removed)>:
>
>> I have Slackware Linux with Apache & Tomcat serving as a Web server
>> and Gateway for a small home based business. I want to switch to
>> Redhat.
>
>The question is why? If Slackware works for you, why not keep it?
>
>There are some reasons for running one of those $$ enterprise
>versions:
>
>- You want/need the support
>
>- You need to run some $$ app which is only certified on one of
> those distro
>
>- Your hardware vendor requires you to run it to get support
>
>- You want/need the 5 years patches availability, as you simply
> can't upgrade the massive amount of systems every one/two
> years in your data centers.
>
>- More I didn't thought of while typing.
>
>> Which Redhat should I use?
>> Is the workstation version adequate?
>
>It misses IIRC some server packages, likely tomcat is among them.
>
>> Not too busy a web site plus I don't need to buy a whole lot of tech
>> support which seems to come with the more expensive versions of
>> Redhat.
>
>You could use then http://whiteboxlinux.org/, which is more or
>less exactly redhat enterprise without payed support, or one of
>the other clones available.
>
>--
>Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
>mail: echo (E-Mail Removed) | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
>#bofh excuse 38: secretary plugged hairdryer into UPS


There were two reasons:

1. Having heck of a problem getting Slack 10 to install on a new
server with a Xenon processor. I know its possible, just very
difficult.

2. Seems most businesses use RedHat and since I'm in the line of work,
just wanted to become familiar with RedHat.


Nevertheless, your responce convinces to me to stay with Slackware.
thanks


Old guy II

Mike wrote:

> There were two reasons:
>
> 1. Having heck of a problem getting Slack 10 to install on a new
> server with a Xenon processor. I know its possible, just very
> difficult.
>
> 2. Seems most businesses use RedHat and since I'm in the line of work,
> just wanted to become familiar with RedHat.
>

Hmmm. Damn few people move from Slack to RH.... it's usually the other way
around. You ought to take your install issue to alt.os.linux.slackware and
ask over there. I'm sure they can get you up and running in no time. I've not
heard of any major issues with Slack (or any Linux flavor) with the Xenon
processor.

From my experience, if you can't get Slack to run on the Xenon you will NEVER
get RH to run on it !! I don't have that beast so I can't speak with any
authority, but I've found Slack to be more flexible with "odd" hardware than
the more "GUI-based" admin-ed systems like MDK, RH, and SuSE. But YMMV.

If you want to run RH to "learn it" then do a full install of everything.

Al C.
__________________________________________________ ________
Adams-Blake Company, Inc.
***
JAYA123 - the web-based total-office system for the
small biz. Order entry, billing, bookkeeping, etc. for $14.95
a month. Perfect for the small business or start-up.
See demo at: http://www.jaya123.com
***

In comp.os.linux.networking Al. C <(E-Mail Removed)>:
> Mike wrote:

>> There were two reasons:
>>
>> 1. Having heck of a problem getting Slack 10 to install on a new
>> server with a Xenon processor. I know its possible, just very
>> difficult.
>>
>> 2. Seems most businesses use RedHat and since I'm in the line of work,
>> just wanted to become familiar with RedHat.

[..]
> around. You ought to take your install issue to alt.os.linux.slackware and
> ask over there. I'm sure they can get you up and running in no time. I've not
[..]

Yep, full ack!

> From my experience, if you can't get Slack to run on the Xenon you will NEVER
> get RH to run on it !! I don't have that beast so I can't speak with any
> authority, but I've found Slack to be more flexible with "odd" hardware than
> the more "GUI-based" admin-ed systems like MDK, RH, and SuSE. But YMMV.

Would you mind showing where you need anything beside the shell +
vi(m) to admin RH?

--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo (E-Mail Removed) | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 286: Telecommunications is downgrading.

Michael Heiming wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.networking Al. C <(E-Mail Removed)>:
>> Mike wrote:
>
>>> There were two reasons:
>>>
>>> 1. Having heck of a problem getting Slack 10 to install on a new
>>> server with a Xenon processor. I know its possible, just very
>>> difficult.
>>>
>>> 2. Seems most businesses use RedHat and since I'm in the line of work,
>>> just wanted to become familiar with RedHat.
>
> [..]
>> around. You ought to take your install issue to alt.os.linux.slackware and
>> ask over there. I'm sure they can get you up and running in no time. I've
>> not
> [..]
>
> Yep, full ack!
>

Yeah, there are some flamers over there, but by and large the work gets done
if you can ignore the noise.


>
> Would you mind showing where you need anything beside the shell +
> vi(m) to admin RH?
>

I assumed you wanted to "learn" how to admin RH via the GUI interfaces that
they provide. You said you were "in the business" so I thought you might be a
consultant and would go to client offices to show they how to "do it" using
the RH tools.

It seems to me that apart from the basic (to my mind, convoluted) init
scripts, there is not a whole lot of difference in doing a text-based admin
of RH from Slack. The vast majority of the file names are the same, they are
just found in different directories. I don't think you will have a hell of a
lot of trouble and since you don't want to do the GUI thing, then just the
server install will probably suit your needs.

Let us know what you find to be the big differences between admin-ing Slack
(which you already know) from RH. I'd be interested to learn what they are.

ANC

In comp.os.linux.networking Al. C <(E-Mail Removed)>:
> Michael Heiming wrote:

>> In comp.os.linux.networking Al. C <(E-Mail Removed)>:
>>> Mike wrote:
[..]

>>
>> Would you mind showing where you need anything beside the shell +
>> vi(m) to admin RH?
>>

> I assumed you wanted to "learn" how to admin RH via the GUI interfaces that
> they provide. You said you were "in the business" so I thought you might be a
> consultant and would go to client offices to show they how to "do it" using
> the RH tools.

If you take a closer look, I'm not the OP.

> It seems to me that apart from the basic (to my mind, convoluted) init
> scripts, there is not a whole lot of difference in doing a text-based admin
> of RH from Slack. The vast majority of the file names are the same, they are
> just found in different directories. I don't think you will have a hell of a

Exactly.


--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo (E-Mail Removed) | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 196: Me no internet, only janitor, me just
wax floors.

Clinging to sanity, (E-Mail Removed) (Mike) mumbled into her beard:
> I have Slackware Linux with Apache & Tomcat serving as a Web server
> and Gateway for a small home based business. I want to switch to
> Redhat.
>
> Which Redhat should I use?
> Is the workstation version adequate?
>
> Not too busy a web site plus I don't need to buy a whole lot of tech
> support which seems to come with the more expensive versions of
> Redhat.

What do you intend by the change?

- Change for change sake?

- Getting support from RHAT?

- Getting support from others that somewhat support RHAT's
distributions?

Of those, the third seems most nearly valid, if a weak reason.

Unfortunately, there's such a diverse set of options between Fedora
and such as well as elder versions that answering this requires that
YOU have a lot of exposure to various of them in order to decide which
might be preferable.

Frankly, I'd rather point you at either Debian or SuSE as more readily
supportable options...
--
output = reverse("moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc")
http://linuxfinances.info/info/lisp.html
Any programmer who fails to comply with the standard naming,
formatting, or commenting conventions should be shot. If it so
happens that it is inconvenient to shoot him, then he is to be
politely requested to recode his program in adherence to the above
standard. -- Michael Spier, Digital Equipment Corporation

"Al. C" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
>> There were two reasons:
>>
>> 1. Having heck of a problem getting Slack 10 to install on a new
>> server with a Xenon processor. I know its possible, just very
>> difficult.
>>
>> 2. Seems most businesses use RedHat and since I'm in the line of work,
>> just wanted to become familiar with RedHat.
>>
>
> Hmmm. Damn few people move from Slack to RH.... it's usually the other way
> around.

Historically, the exact opposite has been the case.

RHAT became popular with version 3.0 because:

a) RHAT had a system successfully running ELF libraries, and

b) Slackware, at the time, _didn't_ have much luck with the
a.out->ELF transition.

Many, many people moved from Slackware to RHAT over the ELF problem.
I was one of them.
--
If this was helpful, <http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne> rate me
http://linuxfinances.info/info/internet.html
"I found out that when you get married the man becomes the head of the
house. And the woman becomes the neck, and she turns the head any way
she wants to." -- Yakov Smirnoff