Good Morning:
My first introduction to Linux was Slackware (The old InfoMagic 2 CD
sets). A buddy of mine told me to look at Red Hat around the time they
released the 3.03 distribution. I was hooked. Here was a new package
system, RPM, and look at all of the neat things it did. It has only
gotten better, in my opinion, since it's first inception.
As with any idea that's really good, problems sometimes arise because of
it. Red Hat first got a reputation as being innovators, offering a new
way to look at Linux in a stable, friendly environment. The first few
releases were fantastic. 4.0 and the 5.x series continued to show that
Red Hat clearly had insight and focus. Then, things changed.
The continuing drive to make changes and innovations has not necessarily
been the best thing for the Red Hat releases. I've had a chance to look
at several distributions and I see how different things are
handled. Again, these are my opinions, but I seem to share these same
ideas with others I've spoken to. Below are outlined some of the changes
I've noticed:
- Red Hat split the kernel up into multiple packages, instead of just
one. While some feel this was a good thing, how many times have we seen
on this list "How do I upgrade my kernel?". How is managing 10 - 12
packages easier than installing 1?
- Red Hat released Xconfigurator. This is an excellent package. Only
problem is it relies on other packages, which in turn rely on still more
packages, getting the end-user to the point that if they don't install
most of the packages in the distribution, you can't use it.
- Bash is still installed by default as the primary system shell, and has
not been converted to Bash2. Bash2 is clearly superior to Bash.
- egcs is installed instead of gcc-2.95.
- Minimal security is in place after an install. Telnet, FTP, etc. are
wide open if you happened to have installed those packages.
- The "public" FTP is incredibly slow.
- Red Hat is not 100% FHS compliant. I'm still checking on this one, but
my understanding is that this is the case.
- There is no telephone technical support. I know that Red Hat physically
has people in a "technical support" area, but anyone who has called for
real technial support will understand what I mean.
- Customizations and patches original sources. I thought the idea of RPM
was to have pristine sources and manage those. Why are the kernel sources
patched then with stuff from Red Hat that has yet to be approved by the
group producing the kernel? I've seen this with other packages, like
Apache as well.
- Red Hat appears to be going the route of Microsoft. RHCE, increasing
price for the operating system, customizations to the OS that require Red
Hat be installed or packages don't work, etc.
This is not meant to be a rant and rave about Red Hat. They have done
some excellent work in the advancement of Linux, but I think the direction
they are headed in now is not the best for Linux.
I'm looking to put together my own distribution of Linux, and wanted to
find out if anyone on the list here would be interested in helping
out. My main focus will be on simplicity and security. I'd like to build
this from the ground up. I really like the RPM format for packages, so I
would like to stick with that mechanism for maintaining packages. I also
want 100% FHS compliancy. I'd like to be able to take advantage of things
like the newer gcc or bash2.
I need help in writing an installer and hardware detection. Something
simple to start with and then we can go from there.
Again, this email is not meant to belittle the work or efforts done by Red
Hat. These are my opinions of what I've seen, and you're free to agree or
disagree as you wish.
- Mike
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
