FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-26-2008, 12:18 PM
"Patrick O'Callaghan"
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 23:36 -0400, max bianco wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Les <hlhowell@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:45 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > > Why should I be interested in a distribution that makes it
> > > difficult
> > > for me to make my own choices about whether a license is acceptable
> > > or
> > > not? I don't have a problem with downloading my own copy of any
> > > particular code from any particular place under any conditions that I
> > > find acceptable.
> > But that is the problem. The folks with proprietary want to limit your
> > use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up
> > with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run
> > when the OS changes. Furthermore their licenses forbid you from reverse
> > engineering the code to figure out how to make it work some where else,
> > and the owner of the proprietary OS won't let you do any reverse
> > engineering legally to figure out how to interface to the software or
> > hardware he/she/it chooses to no longer support. Thus you are obsoleted
> > with no legal recourse. Those lovely sites where you download such
> > utilities are often legally not clean to use either, depending upon the
> > laws that the various entities have seen fit to pass. Finally your own
> > documents, code and other encoded data may be unaccessable to you
> > either, because the formatting, encoding, encryption or compression may
> > be proprietary and non disclosed with the attendant no reverse
> > engineering clauses, leaving you without access even to your own
> > material.
> >
> > That is why these licenses, and the subject of libre or free software is
> > important.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Les H
> >
> >
> Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
> anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
> it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.

If you mean Firefox then Flashblock, Adblock and Noscript are all
effective. I use all three.

poc

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 12:20 PM
Craig White
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 00:40 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 23:56 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> Craig White wrote:
> >>>>> But that is the problem. The folks with proprietary want to limit your
> >>>>> use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up
> >>>>> with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run
> >>>>> when the OS changes.
> >>>> That's hardly unique to proprietary software. I once relied heavily on
> >>>> CIPE as a VPN, but FC2 just dumped it with no replacement. Yes, I could
> >>>> have kept all the broken pieces of the source code...
> >>> ----
> >>> wasn't the cipe code dropped from the 2.6 kernel?
> >>>
> >> It was never part of the kernel - just a victim of the ever-changing
> >> Linux interfaces. There were eventually patches to fix it, but fedora
> >> never bothered to pick them up or even add openvpn which would have been
> >> a usable replacement.
> > ----
> > been so long that I have forgotten the reason but I know that it was
> > simultaneous to migration to 2.6 kernel that occurred with FC2.
> >
> > anyway...openvpn is indeed available...
>
>
> I guess I gave up looking for it after only a few years...
---
the impatience of youth...

As someone who used cipe way back when, I found it rather trivial to
build openvpn from source and install it so I wasn't much put out
anyway. Then of course, simultaneous with 2.6 kernels, we got openswan
support.

Sometimes I think you just bitch for the sake of bitching.

Craig

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 02:21 PM
max
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Da Rock wrote:

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 00:03 +0200, Daniele Guazzoni wrote:

I try to come back to the initial topic.

I'm following since RedHat 5.0 (which I bought in a bookstore).
As a network and security engineer the reason why to use Linux, BSD, ... but not Microsoft is pretty clear.
I've just simply get pissed off (sorry for my rudeness) of apply updates to security holes twice a week...
I know that the guys and girls in Redmond have evolved and their OS, from the security point of view, are now better then years ago but still...

I have nothing against paying for a piece of software but I want it reliable and I still want to know what's running under my desk.
I personally think that the RH approach (cutting-edge for free on Fedora and stable but licensed on RHEL) is absolutely ok.
It should also be clear that at the end of the day they want to see money flowing in (and keep sponsoring Fedora).

One of the greatest feature of Fedora is the strong community behind it.
If suddenly RH decide to drop the workstation market don't you think that someone will pick up the challenge ?
If you look back at the days RedHat Linux was for free there was only a handful developers and look at Fedora now !


I partially agree with the "lazy" statement earlier in this discussion.
How many of you has once in life compiled the source code and installed manually KDE or Gnome ?
Meaning: yes there was a life without RPM !
Maybe some of you lost the knowledge (or never realized) how Linux works, the way is set up, the inner-sanctum...
Maybe some of you are used of insert a DVD, click a few time and have a system running in 15 minutes...
Or simply some of you complains about bugs or missing features and forgets that you just downloaded it for free...

Don't get me wrong, I also enjoy the easy-life of a graphical setup, wizards and system-tools but if I miss something I'm not lazy enough and I write some shell scripts or compile my own code.


I agree totally- which is what pisses me off about selinux: I like to
exactly whats going on.

The problem is knowing exactly what's going on, this is a huge complex
system. I am studying SELinux and its not hard but not a no brainer
either. It is an additional layer, if i am understanding correctly,
above and beyond the standard unix access control mechanism, It is
consulted when standard unix permissions say the user should be allowed
access but if the request does not pass the unix access control test it
is not consulted because the access is denied anyway.


Max

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 02:35 PM
max
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Da Rock wrote:

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 09:58 -0700, BRUCE STANLEY wrote:


Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
Paul Shaffer wrote:

> This is the attitude that will eventually marginalize Fedora

into a
> non-issue:

I humbly disagree. There's a right and a wrong way to do

things, and I'm
glad fedora chooses to take the higher-ground.

-- Rex


Taking the higher ground means keeping your feet dry.


But if you want help/rescue the drowning user
(e.g. Laptop users, some desktoppers), you have to be willing to
get your feet wet! :-)


Indeed. And even by your count thats a handful versus the world in
computing... I'd say thats marginalized.

What's with the defeatist attitude?still harboring bitterness against
M$? Forget M$!


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 02:37 PM
max
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Da Rock wrote:

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 13:14 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:

Rex Dieter wrote:

I humbly disagree. There's a right and a wrong way to do things,
and I'm glad fedora chooses to take the higher-ground.

I'll drink to that, Rex.

It reminds me of a George Bernard Shaw quote:

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man."

If no one insisted on getting things upstreamed (modules, patches,
etc), the upstream projects would not be as good as they are today.
Fedora's upstream mantra is a damn good thing IMO.


Doesn't anybody understand the art of war? You need to attack from both
sides of this issue- and sometimes one part will need to hold a position
while reinforcements catch up.


Always yield the MORAL high ground to your enemy!

Max

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 02:39 PM
max
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 23:36 -0400, max bianco wrote:

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Les <hlhowell@pacbell.net> wrote:

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:45 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Why should I be interested in a distribution that makes it
> difficult
> for me to make my own choices about whether a license is acceptable
> or
> not? I don't have a problem with downloading my own copy of any
> particular code from any particular place under any conditions that I
> find acceptable.
But that is the problem. The folks with proprietary want to limit your
use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up
with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run
when the OS changes. Furthermore their licenses forbid you from reverse
engineering the code to figure out how to make it work some where else,
and the owner of the proprietary OS won't let you do any reverse
engineering legally to figure out how to interface to the software or
hardware he/she/it chooses to no longer support. Thus you are obsoleted
with no legal recourse. Those lovely sites where you download such
utilities are often legally not clean to use either, depending upon the
laws that the various entities have seen fit to pass. Finally your own
documents, code and other encoded data may be unaccessable to you
either, because the formatting, encoding, encryption or compression may
be proprietary and non disclosed with the attendant no reverse
engineering clauses, leaving you without access even to your own
material.

That is why these licenses, and the subject of libre or free software is
important.

Regards,
Les H



Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.


If you mean Firefox then Flashblock, Adblock and Noscript are all
effective. I use all three.

poc

Yes I have at one time or another tried and used them all but it strikes
me as wrong to have run software A to keep software B from bothering me.
Why install Flash if your going to block it anyway?


Max

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 02:44 PM
max
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Da Rock wrote:

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 11:39 -0600, Robin Laing wrote:

Alastair Neil wrote:


On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com
<mailto:wayward4now@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 13:05 -0700, Francis Earl wrote:
> That article ENTIRELY got it wrong. All RedHat said was they won't be
> pushing Linux on the consumer desktop for some time. They make their
> money from servers, and they are a company, so it's not in their best
> interest to have a product they aren't profiting from.

OTOH, as I've said for years, desktops beget servers. Who in their right
mind would have ever thought that Windows would become a choice as a
server platform?? The Windows3.1 users got used to the desktop and it
rolled from there. Disregard the desktops of college entry level users,
and they'll migrate with their favorite platform and comfort level to
using it to admin their future server needs. What's not to understand in
this? RedHat could very well be blowing their lead and not seeing it
until too late in the game to recover.

We (RH) used to have college programs all over the place ...usually
promoted as install fests at Universities. I haven't heard of one in the
press for years now. Servers are where the money is, no doubt. But, it
is better IMHO to have the future admins loyalty through the user
desktop by catering to them. I spent years in Marketing. I learned to
never EVER disregard the little guy. He might become the next purchasing
agent and/or decision maker. My two cents, Ric


An where has it got Microsoft? 20 years and countless billions invested
in marketing and they still manage only 30% of the server market.


True, Novel lost out to WinNT in part because users got used to the
Windows interface and wanted a similar experience for managing their
servers. I refuse to believe that there is such a gulf between Ubuntu
and RHEL in functionality that users would have the same visceral
reaction and defect in droves from RH to Ubuntu - because they love
brown backgrounds on their Gnome desktops. Red Hat has focused its
desktop efforts on crafting a distribution that is best in class for
administering servers, just as SUSE is crafting a business productivity
centric desktop distribution with an emphasis on Windows
interoperability (thus Evolution, Mono/silverlight and "Don't Sue us
please Bill!" agreements). These distros have carved their own niches,
I don't as yet know what Ubuntu's niche is - windows malcontents? home
tinkerers/hobyists? Small Home Office? You could argue that this is
exactly the way linux started and who knows in 10 or 20 years maybe they
will have a significant enterprise share, however, I doubt it. Being
able to play MP3's out of the box rarely makes it onto a enterprise
server deployment specification.




This is an interesting comment. Just a few days ago, I read an article
about Microsoft pointing out companies that have moved from Linux
servers due to the desktop support as well as gui management tools. Of
course I hear that they are now adding more command line tools for
administration due to demand.


I see two aspects to this part of the debate.

If people use Linux at work, they will be more likely to use it at home.
They will use what they are familiar with. Most computer users are
not that intelligent to using their computers. Some cannot even figure
out how to update their computers.


As for MS not getting a larger server share, this is a strange aspect.
Part of the issue in the past has been many admins that new Unix found
it easier to move to Linux from Solaris or other versions. The share of
Windows servers from what I am reading is increasing. I see this as a
result of the new point and click mentality. If you cannot click it,
then you cannot manage it. Damn kids today.




I know thats the mentality, but my god thats bullshit! I'll use cli
anyday for major tasks- try migrating stats support on a IIS server with
400+ sites then you'll know!

FWIW, this thread has brought out many of the comments that have been
stated in this article.


Did Canonical Just Get Punked by Red Hat and Novell?
http://blog.linuxtoday.com/blog/2008/04/did-canonical-j.html

Basically, the announcements are to support the server sales.

I did like this comment though.

"Curiously, very little attention was paid to Ron Hovespian's comments
on Novell's similar plans, made before Red Hat's. If I were Novell, I
would take this as a bad sign. Not only did the mainstream media not
pick up on Novell's news, but even most of the hard-line Linux
blogosphere wrote them off with nary so much as a "meh" And if you can't
get those folks mad, you must be doing something wrong! "


From the people that I know, the reason to move from Fedora is the
upgrade path being easier. Longer support is appreciated. Some of
these people are also old time Solaris users as well.


I will stick with Fedora as long as I can get third party application
that me and my family use. If they are only available on Ubuntu, then I
will have to move.


I think it comes down to ease of support as well. If support doesn't
keep up then the software is rendered useless. Ie MPlayer and codecs...


Obviously Fedora is not for the faint of heart.

Max

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 03:23 PM
"Patrick O'Callaghan"
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 10:39 -0400, max wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 23:36 -0400, max bianco wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Les <hlhowell@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:45 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> >>> > Why should I be interested in a distribution that makes it
> >>> > difficult
> >>> > for me to make my own choices about whether a license is acceptable
> >>> > or
> >>> > not? I don't have a problem with downloading my own copy of any
> >>> > particular code from any particular place under any conditions that I
> >>> > find acceptable.
> >>> But that is the problem. The folks with proprietary want to limit your
> >>> use to only the systems they have chosen to support, thus you can end up
> >>> with instruments or software that you have purchased that will not run
> >>> when the OS changes. Furthermore their licenses forbid you from reverse
> >>> engineering the code to figure out how to make it work some where else,
> >>> and the owner of the proprietary OS won't let you do any reverse
> >>> engineering legally to figure out how to interface to the software or
> >>> hardware he/she/it chooses to no longer support. Thus you are obsoleted
> >>> with no legal recourse. Those lovely sites where you download such
> >>> utilities are often legally not clean to use either, depending upon the
> >>> laws that the various entities have seen fit to pass. Finally your own
> >>> documents, code and other encoded data may be unaccessable to you
> >>> either, because the formatting, encoding, encryption or compression may
> >>> be proprietary and non disclosed with the attendant no reverse
> >>> engineering clauses, leaving you without access even to your own
> >>> material.
> >>>
> >>> That is why these licenses, and the subject of libre or free software is
> >>> important.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Les H
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
> >> anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
> >> it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.
> >
> > If you mean Firefox then Flashblock, Adblock and Noscript are all
> > effective. I use all three.
> >
> > poc
> >
> Yes I have at one time or another tried and used them all but it strikes
> me as wrong to have run software A to keep software B from bothering me.
> Why install Flash if your going to block it anyway?

Because I can then decide on a case by case basis whether I want to use
it. There are flash sites which I want to see, but by default I block
them until I can decide.

poc

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 03:54 PM
Antonio Olivares
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

--- Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Antonio Olivares
> <olivares14031@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On adobe flash, you bring up an interesting
> point, ads
> > are everywhere, if adobe flash is not present,
> you
> > cannot do anything.
>
> You need to start visiting better sites. No good
> website relies on
> flash that heavily.

Yes, but I have to visit "those sites" otherwise, I
cannot read many messages and posts. I have tried
adblockers, but they make the page load more slowly
and at home, it makes it really a pain in the as*
>
>
> > If some software is illegal, what will the big
> guys do
> > to a little guy? Will they sue me because I have
> > nonfree stuff? What will they do to me? I can
> see
> > the logic for the big corporations and companies,
> but
> > for the little guys, the home users, it does not
> make
> > much sense.
>
> Who says it has to make sense? Big business sue
> little guys all the time.
You are right RIAA rings a bell. Question is why?
do they go after someone who has next to nothing,
instead of others who have more?
>
> --
> Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
> ( www.pembo13.com )
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list@redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>



__________________________________________________ __________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-26-2008, 04:11 PM
Antonio Olivares
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

--- Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Antonio Olivares wrote:
> >
> > I find the comment interesting as well here
> >
> >> Why should I be interested in a distribution
> >> that makes it difficult for me to make my own
> >> choices about whether a license is acceptable
> >> or not? I don't have a problem with downloading
> my
> >> own copy of any particular code from any
> particular
> >> place under any conditions that I find
> acceptable.
> >
> > It is very legitimate. If something does not work
> the
> > way you want it, you have to go your own way and
> while
> > Fedora does not open the doors fully open, it does
> not
> > close the doors to you either.
>
> So you like it because it's not quite impossible to
> do what you want?
>
Yes, it is not impossible. Just leave the default
Fedora stuff alone, put the stuff you need elsewhere
and you are good to go. Fedora does not prohibit us
from compiling from source and installing our own
programs. Now if you want to use third party rpms for
the programs that you need, that is another matter,
that is between you, the third party packagers and the
fedora team. This I cannot say much because I try not
to depend too much on third party packagers.

I commend the third party packagers because they work
hard to make the *non-free stuff* work on Fedora. The
programs work nicely, but then updates come about and
the program might not work as it did and bugs appear
and it takes time for the mirrors to sync and us users
complain that a certain program is not working. We
want everything right here right now, and we simply
cannot have that. It is not a matter of Fedora being
the bad guy, Life is like that in general.
>
> > If some software is illegal, what will the big
> guys do
> > to a little guy? Will they sue me because I have
> > nonfree stuff?
>
> If they had any sense, they would arrange simple
> ways for you to get
> legal, licensed copies.

They tried to do that with Fluendo/Codec Buddy, but in
many ways it sucks! The third party packagers *put
their name here* make programs work in combination
with the fedora programs and everything works as it is
supposed to.

> And the OS would go out of
> its way to make sure
> that the one such copy you obtain continues to run
> for at least the life
> of your machine. With Java, getting the copy is
> matter of accepting the
> form as you download from the Sun site - getting
> fedora to recognize
> that you have a JVM installed for the packages that
> need one is a whole
> different matter.

The legal staff is the one that recommends that Fedora
do this to avoid potential lawsuits and to restrict
certain stuff from happening. Java is coming along
very well, in Fedora 8 there was iced tea, in the
upcoming Fedora 9, there will be an adaptation to the
OpenJDK/ whatever it is called and it is working for
me very well. Of course some of the stuff that Sun
puts in there does not get there because of little
technicalities, but otherwise the product works and
many users appreciate that.
>
> --
> Les Mikesell
> lesmikesell@gmail.com
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list@redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>

Regards,

Antonio


__________________________________________________ __________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org