linux 6.2 or 7.1

[theguy]

just wondering if i should get a server with linux 6.2 or linux 7.1
do all scripts that worked on linux 6.2 work on linux 7.1?

[andyLee]

Do you mean Redhat?

If so, 7.1. It is better to away from hacker. (maybe or maybe not)


You can install any version of script interpreter in both 6.2 and 7.1. So, all scripts should work on bothof them

[ExoWorks]

its always recommended to have the Newer version..
So switch to Redhat 7.2...

[niv]

AFAIK, the current Linux kernel is 2.5.4 [blah]

*BSD is better for usage as a server...Red Hat Linux, although is still exponentially better than any Windows OS, it is evolving into more of a home office/multimedia OS. :devious2:

[ExoWorks]

i would prefere it for windows to say that its a home/office multimedia Operating System ..

[niv]

What, so you're denying the fact that KDE and GNOME and X Windows environments in general are not graphical environments that support many multimedia formats like the media players in Windows, and allow for the usage of home office software? Are you high on Microsoft propaganda again? :confused:

[badviolinist]

Originally posted by Hayama-kun
AFAIK, the current Linux kernel is 2.5.4

Actually, the latest development kernel is 2.5.5. The 2.5 series (as well as all odd-numbered ones) are development kernels and should really only be used if you want to be on the bleeding edge of development, or if you're doing some kernel hacking yourself. Otherwise, go for the most recent stable kernel, which at the moment is 2.4.18. From what I know, they had a discrepancy with the patches, so it might be safer to just go with 2.4.17.

Anyway, that's beside the point. By "linux 6.2 and 7.1", he was probably talking about Red Hat. Red Hat 7.2 comes with the 2.4.7 kernel.



*BSD is better for usage as a server...Red Hat Linux, although is still exponentially better than any Windows OS, it is evolving into more of a home office/multimedia OS. :devious2:
So? What makes BSD so much better than Red Hat Linux as a server (nothing against BSD here)? I use RH as my desktop computer and a server.

[badviolinist]

Originally posted by Hayama-kun
What, so you're denying the fact that KDE and GNOME and X Windows environments in general are not graphical environments that support many multimedia formats like the media players in Windows, and allow for the usage of home office software? Are you high on Microsoft propaganda again? :confused:

I smell a flame war.. ack!

Anyway, we can't really deny that Windows is the choice OS for home use, simply because the average user is too dumb to use something else. In actuality, something like Linux isn't at all any less user-friendly.. its just not too learner-friendly. Efforts are being made to facilitate the administration process, as seen in Red Hat and Mandrake.

Yes, he would correct in denying the fact that KDE and GNOME and X Windows environments in general are not graphical environments that support many multimedia formats like media players in windows. KDE and GNOME don't play the multimedia- its the X programs (well, they dont even have to be X.. mpg321 for example).

Please learn about Windows alternatives a little more before bashing Windows :D

[niv]

Shut up, John. :p

Just because I leave a few things out, or make a few typographical errors, doesn't mean you have to get on my case. Yeesh, I sound like Giancarlo. :nervous:

[badviolinist]

Its not that you left anything out, you were just wrong. I didn't make a big deal out of any typos (were there any at all anyway?) either. :p

[niv]

I meant to say programs that are supported by the KDE and GNOME environments are beginning to catch up with [or do just as good as] Windows programs and do the same tasks [but don't crash every 30 seconds].