“A few days ago, RedHat quietly released version 6.2 of its
Linux distribution. It was available only as a download at the time
of this writing, but should be shipping in shrink wrap by the time
you read this. Overall, the new distribution doesn’t do much for
me, as I’m really only running the OS at the script kiddie level.
But for high-traffic Linux server administrators, it provides some
useful new features.”
“Bottom line: 6.2 adds new security features (including Kerberos
and Netscape 128-bit encryption), a “high-availability installer”
that I couldn’t find and improved RAID support I didn’t need. If it
sounds like I’m being blase about this release, I am. To
“mainstream” users like myself, the differences between 6.2 and 6.1
are minimal. But does that give me the right to complain about
RedHat’s release of version 6.2? Actually, no. I’ve noticed several
threads of RedHat bashing in certain environs, and I think most are
without merit. The prevailing theme is that release 6.2 is
unstable, that there is no real need for it, that it is comprised
mostly of extraneous new Linux utilities and for the most part just
demonstrates RedHat’s inevitable decline into Microsoftian business
tactics.”
“Overall, these comments sound like they come from folks using
Linux much the way I do, namely as a dedicated Web gateway and a
screw-around testing box. In other words, mostly as a curiosity. As
a techno journalist, I need to run it that way, but this is
obviously not what RedHat is trying to sell. I’ve said it
before, and I’ll say it again: Linux is not a casual desktop OS.
You can use it that way, but you’re not exploiting its advantages
if you do.“