|
Home > Archive > Red Hat Topics > February 2005 > Version of Redhat
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Chi Y Kang 2005-02-11, 2:45 am |
| Common version of Redhat ?
| |
| Jean-David Beyer 2005-02-11, 7:45 am |
| Chi Y Kang wrote:
> Common version of Redhat ?
>
What does your question mean?
I am running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 ES on one of my machines.
I am running Red Hat Linux 9 on another; this version may be common, but
it is obsolete and has not been supported in about a year.
I ran Red Hat Linux 7.3 from when it first came out until about October 2004.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 07:25:00 up 22 days, 15:40, 4 users, load average: 2.15, 2.18, 2.27
| |
|
| Chi Y Kang wrote:
> Common version of Redhat ?
>
my first venture into linux was with RH5.2
i could not figure out what all the excitement was about with linux.
RH5.2 came with a very poor version of netscape that crashed all the time...
next i tried RH6x though it was better...
i started experiencing video problems...so gave up on that too
however by the time of RH7 i saw a real good OS finally
and now i am using RH9 which i really like
i have recently done a test installation of FC3 which is good...
but since my RH9 installation is working perfectly...i'm going to just
leave it
btw: i still use windows too as i have an older scsi scanner that i just
plain have not been able to get working under linux...plus i have an old
"windows only" printer that's still working fine...
additionally i use slackware, mandrake and freeBSD
| |
| Jean-David Beyer 2005-02-12, 7:45 am |
| philo wrote:
> Chi Y Kang wrote:
>
>
> my first venture into linux was with RH5.2
> i could not figure out what all the excitement was about with linux.
> RH5.2 came with a very poor version of netscape that crashed all the
> time...
>
> next i tried RH6x though it was better...
> i started experiencing video problems...so gave up on that too
I was luckier than you. I did not like the desktop that came with that
one, but overall, it was so much better than Windows 95 that I put up with it.
>
> however by the time of RH7 i saw a real good OS finally
The only one of that series I used was RHL 7.3, and I liked it a lot.
>
> and now i am using RH9 which i really like
That is running on my other machine, protected by an iptables firewall on
this machine. I have all the Red Hat updates installed on it, but it must
be about a year out of date now. I was going to run Fedora Core 2 on it,
but I had too many problems with it: would not act as a print server for
this machine, the sound (ordinary Soundblaster) would not work (could not
be detected even though standard ISA board that worked on RHL 6, RHL 6.2,
RHL 7.3, and RHL 9), and the updating was too flakey.
>
> i have recently done a test installation of FC3 which is good...
> but since my RH9 installation is working perfectly...i'm going to just
> leave it
If it is not protected by a suitable firewall, you may wish to reconsider
because it has not been supported in about a year and desireable security
updates are not going in (unless you have other means to ensure that).
>
> btw: i still use windows too as i have an older scsi scanner that i just
> plain have not been able to get working under linux...plus i have an old
> "windows only" printer that's still working fine...
>
> additionally i use slackware, mandrake and freeBSD
>
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:20:00 up 23 days, 16:35, 4 users, load average: 3.38, 3.27, 3.20
| |
|
| Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> philo wrote:
>
>
>
> I was luckier than you. I did not like the desktop that came with that
> one, but overall, it was so much better than Windows 95 that I put up
> with it.
>
>
>
> The only one of that series I used was RHL 7.3, and I liked it a lot.
>
>
>
> That is running on my other machine, protected by an iptables firewall
> on this machine. I have all the Red Hat updates installed on it, but it
> must be about a year out of date now. I was going to run Fedora Core 2
> on it, but I had too many problems with it: would not act as a print
> server for this machine, the sound (ordinary Soundblaster) would not
> work (could not be detected even though standard ISA board that worked
> on RHL 6, RHL 6.2, RHL 7.3, and RHL 9), and the updating was too flakey.
>
>
>
> If it is not protected by a suitable firewall, you may wish to
> reconsider because it has not been supported in about a year and
> desireable security updates are not going in (unless you have other
> means to ensure that).
well
the first thing i did after installing RH9 was perform all the updates
....i actually installed it after FC1 had been out...
but at this point i can no longer update it...
so a move to FC3 (or the next) would be in order if i'd even need to
update my machine...
i have my security level set "high" as i have only dchp enabled...
the whole thing is behind a router
and it's only on-line occasionally
at this point i can't justify a change
|
|
|
|
|