Advanced

Red Hat exec says Novell sells beta code

Posted by Sander_Marechal on · 3 comments
ZDNet; By Peter Judge
Mail this story
Print this story

Red Hat has an announcement tomorrow that we'll be telling you about in due course. In the meantime, here's a snippet: a Red Hat vice president slated Novell's real-time SUSE Linux which launched last week, saying it's code that Red Hat would only treat as beta - and Red Hat should know because it wrote most of it.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: News Story; Groups: Novell, Red Hat

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (3)

When SLES9 came out it had the 2.6 kernel, which Red Hat also said was crap (because they "wrote" most of it)... and then later came out with their own 2.6 distro that was based on a less stable 2.6 than what SUSE used.... typical....
Yes, I remember that - while redhat was busy maintaining their own special fork of 2.4 plus backported scheduler and other stuff, suse shipped SLES 9 with the 2.6 kernel. It was, and is, best described as "solid".

Even now, it's a workhorse in our data center:

root@ashpool:~> uptime 2:38pm up 964 days 2:08, 1 user, load average: 2.17, 2.36, 2.36 root@ashpool:~> uname -a Linux ashpool 2.6.5-7.151-smp #1 SMP Fri Mar 18 11:31:21 UTC 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
qasles10

Uptime: 5:15am up 440 days 17:01, 4 users, load average: 0.12, 0.03, 0.01

Linux qasles10 2.6.16.21-0.8-bigsmp #1 SMP Mon Jul 3 18:25:39 UTC 2006 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux

(from our nightly recording of such things... of course, would be better to be running something patched... ah.. the upsides and downsides of uptime)

The main thing in RHAS 3 was backporting of posix threads to 2.4. That was pretty unique, but of course, 3 months later SLES 9 came out and slaughtered them in the benchies. Then RH did RHELAS 4, then RHEL 5, made an oops, had to come out (called it a naming change) with RHEL 4.5 (so older sw would continue to run) and now RHEL 5.1 (what would have been called Update 1 prior to the 4 to 5 debacle). SLES 10 avoided the debacle by releasing before the kernel changes were made to obliterate support for some older stuff. Red Hat has really bad timing.

Just for "hysterical raisins"... Red Hat watched as SUSE Prof. 9.0 came out, based on the 2.4 kernel and I think they assumed that SLES9 would likewise be 2.4 based (and thus they released RHAS 3 with a 2.4 kernel). I think they got taken by surprise when SUSE switched to 2.6 for 9.1 and based SLES9 on that.... and thus the propaganda about how horrible 2.6 is, etc.

We'll have to see if the "we write crappy code" propaganda technique works for Red Hat or not. I'm guessing "not" at this point.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post