How broken is Infomagic's Redhat linux?
Alex Farran
I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
ROM. Being a clueless Linux newbie, I have no idea what else I may be
missing. The LDR also contains Slackware Linux.
So, does anyone know how much of Redhat is missing/broken? Is Slackware
similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
it is worth fixing?
Thankyou for your time.
Alex (Who thinks he should have bought LCNR)
Joel Goldberger
Alex Farran wrote:
>
> I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
> Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
> disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
> ROM. Being a clueless Linux newbie, I have no idea what else I may be
> missing. The LDR also contains Slackware Linux.
>
> So, does anyone know how much of Redhat is missing/broken? Is Slackware
> similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
> it is worth fixing?
When Red Hat distribute their product they include a number of things besides
the RPMS required to install the system, in particular they include various
parts of a mountable filesystem on the CD that support the "floppyless" install
that they mention in both the readme files, and in greater detail in their manual.
InfoMagic does not claim to be distributing an identical product to the Red Hat
package, nor would we likely be able to due to copyright issues. The parts
we are permitted to distribute and what is included on the LDR are the RPMS that
can be installed via a floppy based setup. There is nothing broken about these
packages. We confirmed their functioning prior to mastering, but only using the
floppy based install.
The "docs" directory to which their readme refers contain identical copies of the
standard Linux HowTo's which we have also provided on our CD set, although not in
the place referenced by Red Hat's documentation. We were careful to retain all
Red Hat specific docs that were available at the time of production.
For better or worse, there is considerable material on installation that only
appears in the Red Hat manual which to date we have not found an online
redistributable copy of.
For the record, the Slackware distribution on the CD set is *NOT* broken, nor
in our view is the Red Hat.
--
Joel Goldberger Phone: 520-526-9565
InfoMagic, Inc. FAX: 520-526-9573
Martin Vernon
Alex Farran (al...@mj12.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
> Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
> disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
> ROM. Being a clueless Linux newbie, I have no idea what else I may be
> missing. The LDR also contains Slackware Linux.
>
> So, does anyone know how much of Redhat is missing/broken? Is Slackware
> similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
> it is worth fixing?
If you want (and have space for) everything, the Redhat is supposedly
better than Slackware.
However, if you want flexibility of choice in what you want and don't
want to install, then use Slackware.
The other point worth considering, is that Slackware is becoming rather
ubiquitous now, analogous to the Epson in the dot matrix printer world.
--
Martin Vernon, Sysop GB7OS/GB7OSP, Chairman GCPG, IP Co-ordinator N. Wales
GW6HVA@GB7OSP, gw6...@gb7osp.ampr.org, e-mail: mar...@gw6hva.demon.co.uk
Voice: +44 589 900 564 Data: GB7OSP V32.bis, 8N1, ANSI +44 1492 872 467
Marc Ewing
On Thu, 25 Jul 1996 14:57:18 -0700, Joel Goldberger <Jo...@InfoMagic.com> wrote:
>Alex Farran wrote:
>>
>> I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
>> Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
>> disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
>> ROM. Being a clueless Linux newbie, I have no idea what else I may be
>> missing. The LDR also contains Slackware Linux.
>>
>> So, does anyone know how much of Redhat is missing/broken? Is Slackware
>> similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
>> it is worth fixing?
>
>the RPMS required to install the system, in particular they include various
>parts of a mountable filesystem on the CD that support the "floppyless"
>install that they mention in both the readme files, and in greater detail in
>their manual.
>InfoMagic does not claim to be distributing an identical product to the
>Red Hat package, nor would we likely be able to due to copyright issues.
>The parts we are permitted to distribute and what is included on the LDR
>are the RPMS that can be installed via a floppy based setup. There is
>nothing broken about these packages. We confirmed their functioning prior
>to mastering, but only using the floppy based install.
Just to be clear, Red Hat Linux is available under the terms of the
GPL, from ftp.redhat.com, many mirrors site, and many CD-ROM distributors,
including InfoMagic. Red Hat Software ships a version on Red Hat Linux
on CD-ROM, with a manual, etc, but which also includes a copy of
Metrolink's X server. This X server is not freely redistributable.
So, as far as I'm aware, InfoMagic's copy of Red Hat Linux is a full
and complete version, and supports CD-ROM, hard drive, floppy, and FTP
installs, all of which result in exactly the same thing -- a complete
installation of Red Hat Linux.
-Marc
Graham Swallow
al...@mj12.demon.co.uk (Alex Farran) writes:
> I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
> Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
> disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
I had the same problem, it never booted from the CDROM with one
diskette, but three diskettes worked just fine (with the CDROM).
Graham g...@trix.dircon.co.uk
--
-----------------------------------
http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~trix <-- Linux Info Pages
http://trix.dircon.co.uk/ (dial-up) <-- Raven Kept Here
-----------------------------------
Dominic Mitchell
On Sat, 27 Jul 1996 10:53:26 +0100, Alex Farran <al...@mj12.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> OK, but I'm still having problems:
> 1. The icons on the control panel will disappear for no good reason, and
> can only be restored by restarting it.
Don't know I'm afraid.
> 2. man -k never retrieves anything.
A shame, but a common problem, even with many commercial Unices. In
this case, I suspect it is simply that you haven't left your computer
on long enough. If you have a look in /etc/crontab, you will see
lines like these:
# Make the whatis databases
21 03 * * 1 root /usr/sbin/makewhatis /usr/man /usr/X11R6/man
If you run the command ``/usr/sbin/makewhatis /usr/man /usr/X11R6/man''
on it's own, it will build the database for man -k for you.
> 3. Some items on the menu do not start the program that they are
> supposed to start, even though the program can be started from the
> command line.
I can't say for sure (I've altered my setup too much), but it's
usually a mismatch between hardcoded paths in a configuration file and
an executable that has moved.
Try looking in the file /etc/X11/fvwm/system.fvwmrc, for things which
have pathnames in front of them. If that still doesn't work, try
using ``which exename'' to find out where it is and hard-code the
pathname yourself.
> These aren't major problems, but they don't give me great confidence in
> Redhat Linux.
>
> Alex
-Dom
Alex Farran
In article <slrn4vgj7...@schroeder.redhat.com>,
ma...@schroeder.redhat.com says...
> So, as far as I'm aware, InfoMagic's copy of Red Hat Linux is a full
> and complete version, and supports CD-ROM, hard drive, floppy, and FTP
> installs, all of which result in exactly the same thing -- a complete
> installation of Red Hat Linux.
>
> -Marc
>
OK, but I'm still having problems:
1. The icons on the control panel will disappear for no good reason, and
can only be restored by restarting it.
2. man -k never retrieves anything.
3. Some items on the menu do not start the program that they are
supposed to start, even though the program can be started from the
command line.
These aren't major problems, but they don't give me great confidence in
Redhat Linux.
Alex
steve
Martin Vernon wrote:
>
> Alex Farran (al...@mj12.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> > I have succeeded in installing Redhat Linux from the Infomagic Linux
> > Developers Resource. To do this I had to make a boot disk and two RAM
> > disks. It is supposed to be possible to install Redhat just from the CD-
> > missing. The LDR also contains Slackware Linux.
> >
> > So, does anyone know how much of Redhat is missing/broken? Is Slackware
> > similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
> > it is worth fixing?
I am also having trouble with RedHats installation. One time it
recognized my cdrom and then refused to do so for the rest of the night.
Found the right parameters to enter for the cd but the x installation
froze as it was scanning for the installation packages. I retried 5 more
times until I relented and chose the text base install.
The rest seemed to go OK. X started up fine after the installation, and
I was pleasantly surprised to see the httpd server installed. It was
also good to see the arena web browser already set up.
Some other problems though:
Doesn't give you an option to automatically mount your msdos system at
boot time.
games such as sdoom, xdoom and abuse are missing libvga.so.1, libXt? and
a couple of other things by the look of it.
glint doesn't verify packages properly.
Some things are set up perfectly, while others are not recognized at
all, and they are in my path.
This looks like it could be a great package, considering the above
problems are relatively minor.
Maybe next time I should go for the Official RedHat distribution.
steve.
Andrew Bray
In article <slrn4vk36...@myrddin.demon.co.uk>,
Dominic Mitchell <d...@myrddin.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Jul 1996 10:53:26 +0100, Alex Farran <al...@mj12.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> 1. The icons on the control panel will disappear for no good reason, and
>> can only be restored by restarting it.
>
I think this is because the control panel waits for applications that are
started from it.
For example, if I start glint from the CP, glint starts up, and the icons
are still there. Do something that would require a redraw of the CP, the
icons are gone. Exit glint, and the icons return.
Regards,
Andy
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Bray | preferred: mailto:an...@chaos.org.uk
London, England | or: mailto:an...@madhouse.demon.co.uk
Robert Brockway
: > similarly broken? If not, is Redhat so much better than Slackware that
: > it is worth fixing?
:
: If you want (and have space for) everything, the Redhat is supposedly
: better than Slackware.
I've tried both, and definitely prefer RedHat.
: However, if you want flexibility of choice in what you want and don't
: want to install, then use Slackware.
Not at all. I was told this, and it discouraged me from changing over from
Slackware to RedHat. Infact, during the install (through X), i discovered
you can decide to install/uninstall with fine granularity. for example, I
decided not too install innd. Just double click on the icon representing
the package. You can then select/unselect sub-packages as desired.
: The other point worth considering, is that Slackware is becoming rather
: ubiquitous now, analogous to the Epson in the dot matrix printer world.
Actually, Slackware is less of a standard than it was 1-2 years ago. RedHat,
and Debian are catching up fast.
Cheers,
-Robert
--Robert Brockway, email: s31...@student.uq.edu.au
WWW: http://student.uq.edu.au/~s316674
Computers: Can't live with them, can't play Quake without them.
Rick Moen
Robert Brockway (rob...@zen.humbug.org.au) wrote:
: I've tried both, and definitely prefer RedHat.
: : However, if you want flexibility of choice in what you want and don't
: : want to install, then use Slackware.
: Not at all. I was told this, and it discouraged me from changing over from
: Slackware to RedHat. Infact, during the install (through X), i discovered
: you can decide to install/uninstall with fine granularity. for example, I
: decided not too install innd. Just double click on the icon representing
: the package. You can then select/unselect sub-packages as desired.
True. Just a comment:
It might be worth mentioning that this sub-package selection is available
if doing the X-based installation, but not if doing the text-mode one.
(You did qualify what you said with "through X", but I thought I'd
best elaborate for the other guy's benefit.)
Personally, this doesn't matter to me: I just make sure I have lots of
disk space, and tell the installer to put in everything. Then, when
I decide what I _don't_ want, at my leisure, I just remove it.
However, I can see how this might be frustrating to someone stuck in
text mode with inadequate disk space, or someone who is taken by surprise
by the _lack_ of fine granularity in the text-mode installer.
(The text-mode installer runs Red Hat's "RPM" package manager, and lets
you say only yes or no to entire categories of packages, not to individual
packages.)
--
Cheers, A post is just a post
Rick Moen My admin will deny.
ri...@hugin.imat.com The usual disclaimers apply
As news spools by.
root
On 12 Aug 1996 04:46:05 GMT, Rick Moen <ri...@hugin.imat.com> wrote:
>(The text-mode installer runs Red Hat's "RPM" package manager, and lets
>you say only yes or no to entire categories of packages, not to individual
>packages.)
i have, but mine let me pick individual packages. I mean, there are
catagories, but then i got to choose which packages out of the catagories
i wanted to install.
I was talking to a friend yesterday who said that the debian
install is nice because it has a dependancy system that tells you which
packges use which other packages. If you choose to install a package
that contains perl scripts, then the install program will tell you that
perl needs installed as well if you want to use the scripts. That was
purely an example and I havent played with it myself so i dont konw for
sure. i wish I had the time to sit around and install Linux
distributions and see which I like the best.
-Phil
Mark Phillips
al...@mj12.demon.co.uk (Alex Farran) writes:
> OK, but I'm still having problems:
> 1. The icons on the control panel will disappear for no good reason, and
> can only be restored by restarting it.
> 2. man -k never retrieves anything.
You need to run makewhatis (or is it mkwhatis).
BUT, you MUST first install the update on the Infomagic CD
(RedHat/updates?????) for the manual pages, otherwise it will not run
correctly!
--
Mark Phillips
m...@nortel.co.uk
Michael De La Rue
In article <slrn50uba...@ross.cis.pitt.edu>,
root <ro...@ross.cis.pitt.edu> wrote:
>On 12 Aug 1996 04:46:05 GMT, Rick Moen <ri...@hugin.imat.com> wrote:
>>(The text-mode installer runs Red Hat's "RPM" package manager, and lets
>>you say only yes or no to entire categories of packages, not to individual
>>packages.)
> I dont konw if you've run a different redhat install program that
>i have, but mine let me pick individual packages. I mean, there are
>catagories, but then i got to choose which packages out of the catagories
>i wanted to install.
This is a function of the version of RedHat you have I think. The
change took place between 2.0 and 3.0 I think. Redhat 4 will solve most
of the problems I have with the system, for example the packaging system
will add dependencies like Debian. The Rembrandt release (for
experienced users only) already has that stuff. It's only available by
ftp though.
>;[dependancies are nice]
The really nice thing about redhat, though , is that every major public
package seems to get sent to their ftp site in RPM form, so installing
them all is really easy.
--
<http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~mikedlr/biography.html>
Scottish Climbing Archive: <http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~mikedlr/climbing/>
Linux/Unix clone@ftp://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/packages/linux/sunsite.unc-mirror/docs/
Nigel.Metheringham
mik...@tardis.ed.ac.uk (Michael De La Rue) writes:
>
> In article <slrn50uba...@ross.cis.pitt.edu>,
> root <ro...@ross.cis.pitt.edu> wrote:
> >On 12 Aug 1996 04:46:05 GMT, Rick Moen <ri...@hugin.imat.com> wrote:
> >>(The text-mode installer runs Red Hat's "RPM" package manager, and lets
> >>you say only yes or no to entire categories of packages, not to individual
> >>packages.)
> > I dont konw if you've run a different redhat install program that
> >i have, but mine let me pick individual packages. I mean, there are
> >catagories, but then i got to choose which packages out of the catagories
> >i wanted to install.
>
>
> This is a function of the version of RedHat you have I think. The
> change took place between 2.0 and 3.0 I think. Redhat 4 will solve most
> of the problems I have with the system, for example the packaging system
> will add dependencies like Debian. The Rembrandt release (for
> experienced users only) already has that stuff. It's only available by
> ftp though.
2.0/2.1 had group selection only.
3.0.3 (Picasso) has group selection followed by packages in each
group.
3.0.4 (Rembrandt beta) has Function selection to preload a set of
packages, then a huge list of packages in a small window to allow you
to toggle the packages that are actually installed. Its horrible -
the UI doesn't work well in this case, but RH are working on this -
its been a pretty standard complaint for the Rembradnt betas.
The dependancies are mostly package dependancies - ie install exmh and
it tells you that you need mh, and offers to install that too.
If you are running Red Hat then there is a major security update
required for all versions (actually this also affects all other Linux
distributions) - you need to update the mount and utils packages due
to a buffer overrun problem in mount. Unfortunately I cannot find the
announcement in the all new look web site (which I will take up with
them!), but here is the announce from BugTraq
http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~jmyers/bugtraq/1164.html
The original bug announcment is at this URL:-
http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~jmyers/bugtraq/1147.html
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel.Met...@theplanet.net - Unix Applications Engineer ]
[ *Views expressed here are personal and not supported by PLAnet* ]
[ PLAnet Online : The White House Tel : +44 113 251 6012 ]
[ Melbourne Street, Leeds LS2 7PS UK. Fax : +44 113 2345656 ]
stephen benson
On 12 Aug 1996 04:46:05 GMT, ri...@hugin.imat.com (Rick Moen) wrote:
>Robert Brockway (rob...@zen.humbug.org.au) wrote:
>
>: I've tried both, and definitely prefer RedHat.
>
>: : However, if you want flexibility of choice in what you want and don't
>: : want to install, then use Slackware.
My understanding was flexibility _is_ an issue -- if you install lots
of packages which are not a part of the distribution. Is this true?
I'm a slacker from way back btw
Phillip Summers
Rick Moen wrote:
> (The text-mode installer runs Red Hat's "RPM" package manager, and lets
> you say only yes or no to entire categories of packages, not to individual
> packages.)
>
> --
Not quite, - yes you do select categories of packages - but then there
is the option to fine-tune each of these categories to select individual
items eg To Doom or Not To Doom?
Phil
--
******************************************************
* Phil Summers * "I Wanted To See You" *
* MOS Design Dept. * "Walking Backwards" *
* Texas Instruments Ltd. * "To Get The Sensation" *
* Northampton * "Of You Coming Home" *
******************************************************
* phillip...@tiuk.ti.com *
******************************************************