CentOS 5.2 - Send in the Clones

Filed under
Linux

CentOS, for those unfamiliar, is a clone distribution. The maintainers take the freely-available source code released by Redhat for its commercial Redhat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) product and recompile it, stripping out any trademarked artwork, then redistribute it as CentOS.

Because of this, CentOS is probably the closest equivalent to a free-of-charge RHEL that you can get. I recommend CentOS to anyone trying to learn more about RHEL, particularly for Redhat certification exams or corporate reasons.

Because it's based on the stable-by-design RHEL rather than Fedora, each version of CentOS focuses more on evolution than revolution. You won't see the eye-candy or new, largely untested gizmos that make Fedora popular.

The end result makes CentOS stable, but not particularly thrilling. I personally don't mind this (having used stable-but-not-exciting Ubuntu Hardy for several months now), but I thought it best to warn you ahead of time.

More Here




re: CentOS

Surprisingly most people just don't "get" RHEL/CENTOS.

It's a ENTERPRISE OS. It's not bleeding edge, it's solid, it's secure, it's stable.

Personally, I don't know anyone that runs RHEL/CENTOS as a desktop - it's servers, servers, and more servers. Nor do they run a GUI.

I had to Google "pirut" to find out what this guy was whining about.

Using YUM in a terminal has NONE of those problems. Nor do I need a IM Client to "chat" from my server (I have a desktop computer for that).

The CentOS forums are chock full of people that should be using Unoobtu going "how can I configure the logout sound not to be cut off" and trivial (useless) crap like that.

What part of ENTERPRISE CLASS is unclear. It's in the freaking name - how much more obvious can they get?

RE: ENTERPRISE CLASS

What, you can't use an ENTERPRISE LINUX DESKTOP in a corporate environment? What should you be using for a DESKTOP then? Windows XP? Vista? Mac OS X? Unoobtoo? Dehbeeann?

RHEL *includes* a good deal of DESKTOP applications. The morons have even rebased the system to the latest $h1tfox 3.0 and the latest Evolootion. Why would have they do that if NO ONE is expected to run RHEL on the desktop?!

Quick hint: Red Hat Desktop is $80/yr (Basic Subscription)
https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/desktop/
Also:
http://beranger.org/miscd/RHEL5_Desktop_chooser.png

more centos

Béranger wrote:
Why would have they do that if NO ONE is expected to run RHEL on the desktop?!

Like all businesses, they want to soak up any possible sale (read: profit) for the least amount of effort.

Except for developers and die hard Linux shops - Enterprise runs on AD and GPO, so yes, the expectation is that Enterprises will be running XP or Vista on the desktop to fully integrate with AD.

RHEL is pushing their own Directory Server, so it looks like SUSE is the best chance of getting a fully integrated Linux Desktop / AD solution.

RHEL might offer a Linux Desktop, but they've publicly stated they don't think its worth it or really even necessary in todays market.

centos

I use CentOS 5.2, and i think is a very stable distribution. It's very compatible with other software certificate for RH. Then if you must install software for RH (like Oracle database) and you don't want support from OS vendors, CentOS is the best choice.
It's 100% compatible, CentOS is made by the same source code of RH. An RPM package for RH is compatible con CentOS. I use CentOS also in Vmware ESX 3 environment and work very fast and stable.
CentOS have also yum installed and configured to download updates and other software.
Under CentOS i have installed, Oracle database, Oracle AS, Oracle Portal, in not production environment, Oracle yet not support CentOS.
I have installed CentOS in production environment for Apache + Mono application (.net), OpenNMS.
CentOS is a good choice for anyone want a enterprise distribution for free.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.