Beyond Scientific Linux - Page 2

hadrons123 · #16 19th August 2012, 03:00 AM

no gnome 2.
http://www.serverwatch.com/server-tr...e-linux-7.html

Demz3 · #17 19th August 2012, 03:10 AM

will be interesting to see how Gnome3 goes in RHEL7 then

kpedersen · #18 19th August 2012, 01:37 PM

Even though I find the idea of a desktop environment on a server quite ridiculous, for the server version of RHEL, it might work quite well because it will mainly only be needed for maintenance anyway.

For example in Windows Server 2012.
http://cdn.windows8update.com/wp-con...erver-2012.jpg

Who knows, this might be quite refreshing to see. (Though I imagine the only button that will be used will be the terminal emulator. All the rest will probably be removed on a typical installation

For the desktop versions of RHEL7, I think it is a big mistake to not offer both.

R3v0lut10nary · #19 19th August 2012, 05:12 PM

I can't imagine any serious Red Hat client caring about the desktop much. At my company it has strictly been used as a server and we're moving to CentOS because our admins said they don't really need the support.

stevea · #20 19th August 2012, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R3v0lut10nary

I can't imagine any serious Red Hat client caring about the desktop much. At my company it has strictly been used as a server and we're moving to CentOS because our admins said they don't really need the support.

Redhat is sold for workstations too. I imagine a lot of is is for admins & developers who want 'same environment'. When I was developing for some other kernel it was necessary to have RH compatibility so we had lots of RH licenses for testing & devl. Yes it matters.

Other new features like systemd will impact their main customer base a lot more.

---------- Post added at 02:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:36 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpedersen

Even though I find the idea of a desktop environment on a server quite ridiculous, for the server version of RHEL, it might work quite well because it will mainly only be needed for maintenance anyway.

So you are unaware of any admin gui tools ?

hadrons123 · #21 19th August 2012, 07:43 PM

I think if cinnamon could make it to red hat repos it wont make RHEL 7 look so bad as it seems now with Gnome 3 being stoned to death everywhere.

angryfirelord · #22 20th August 2012, 02:17 PM

I suspect that they'll probably go the same route as Debian and make XFCE the default.

stevea · #23 21st August 2012, 12:50 AM

Wanna bet ?

I'll wager they deliver Gnome3, KDE and NO cinnamon with RHEL7.

Cinnamon is not well enough supported and doesn't represent a futures path.
XFCE & LXDE aren't even a RH option with RHEL6 (Gnome or KDE only) - so that's a "zero-probability event" for RHEL7.
You guys need to cut back on the meds.

hadrons123 · #24 21st August 2012, 02:40 AM

I would also bet RHEL 7 would come with gnome 3. But only if RH succumbs to pressure it would ship with something else.

#25 21st August 2012, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevea

Wanna bet ?

I'll wager they deliver Gnome3, KDE and NO cinnamon with RHEL7.

Cinnamon is not well enough supported and doesn't represent a futures path.
XFCE & LXDE aren't even a RH option with RHEL6 (Gnome or KDE only) - so that's a "zero-probability event" for RHEL7.
You guys need to cut back on the meds.

That's a safe bet.
Cinnamon probably won't be included, however it will be available for RHEL7 from EPEL (that's a fact).

stevea · #26 21st August 2012, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hadrons123

I would also bet RHEL 7 would come with gnome 3. But only if RH succumbs to pressure it would ship with something else.

Typically there isn't a lot of pressure until the product is out (or in beta) and found to be painful. I seriously doubt pro-sysadmins are gonna worry a lot about Gnome3. IMO at most Gnome3 gets some revisions to meet customer demands in 7.1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellowman

That's a safe bet.
Cinnamon probably won't be included, however it will be available for RHEL7 from EPEL (that's a fact).

There is no 'probably' about it. RHEL is not gonna include cinnamon or any other half-baked untested package that isn't on the RH roadmap. RHEL actually has a fairly restricted set of well-honed and hard-tested packages which is why things like EPEL are successful as a relief valve. Most Fedora users would be surprised to see how few packages are in the RHEL repo.

If G3 was felt to be a disaster between now & release they might include G2 as a fallback position, but that's increasingly improbable as the release date nears. Cinnamon, LXDE, XFCE - zero probability.

#27 21st August 2012, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevea

Typically there isn't a lot of pressure until the product is out (or in beta) and found to be painful. I seriously doubt pro-sysadmins are gonna worry a lot about Gnome3. IMO at most Gnome3 gets some revisions to meet customer demands in 7.1.

There is no 'probably' about it. RHEL is not gonna include cinnamon or any other half-baked untested package that isn't on the RH roadmap. RHEL actually has a fairly restricted set of well-honed and hard-tested packages which is why things like EPEL are successful as a relief valve. Most Fedora users would be surprised to see how few packages are in the RHEL repo.

If G3 was felt to be a disaster between now & release they might include G2 as a fallback position, but that's increasingly improbable as the release date nears. Cinnamon, LXDE, XFCE - zero probability.

They included compiz which was far more flawed IMO.

jpollard · #28 21st August 2012, 11:07 AM

Makes one wonder about the crappy systemd and NetworkManager situation.

stevea · #29 21st August 2012, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellowman

They included compiz which was far more flawed IMO.

It's not a question of "flawed" alone, it' also a question of whether it's on a roadmap and there is support w/in RH. I must agree that compiz is a strange choice for a serve distro, support headache, only works on select hardware, and lot of extra bugs for a "frills" feature. Cinnamon appears to me to be a Fedoraprojects "outsider'' effort not supported by RH and way off the reservation wrt roadmap. Maybe someday in RH, but ...

I should give cinnamon another try at F18 (November). I tried a very early version and it just wasn't enough at that time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpollard

Makes one wonder about the crappy systemd and NetworkManager situation.

NM is already in RHEL6. Since you judge any change as "crappy", I'm pretty sure I don't care about your opinion on the specifics. I am not aware of any major roadblocks for either NM nor systemd at the moment, but RHEL7 will pull from F18.

jpollard · #30 21st August 2012, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevea

It's not a question of "flawed" alone, it' also a question of whether it's on a roadmap and there is support w/in RH. I must agree that compiz is a strange choice for a serve distro, support headache, only works on select hardware, and lot of extra bugs for a "frills" feature. Cinnamon appears to me to be a Fedoraprojects "outsider'' effort not supported by RH and way off the reservation wrt roadmap. Maybe someday in RH, but ...

I should give cinnamon another try at F18 (November). I tried a very early version and it just wasn't enough at that time.

I don't think too much of cinnamon myself, but my wife likes it a lot.

Quote:

NM is already in RHEL6. Since you judge any change as "crappy", I'm pretty sure I don't care about your opinion on the specifics. I am not aware of any major roadblocks for either NM nor systemd at the moment, but RHEL7 will pull from F18.

Not any change - just bad changes. And I already know you don't care if servers can be easily configured or not.

NM still has problems with VMs, still has problems with multiple interfaces...

It didn't have any of these in F14.

systemd is still causing heartburn with things not working correctly, or doing thing that are peculiar, or allowing site specific things to be done properly

As for F17, I suppose that means it won't boot either...