Red HatThis forum is for the discussion of Red Hat Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
We are thinking about buying Redhat Enterprise Linux for our departmental server. However, we are not sure whether we should choose ES or WS. According to redhat, we should be choosing ES, but ES is very expensive. Does anyone whether the Kernel is configured differently between ES and WS? According to their online docs, it seems WS is just lacking some servers that we can easily install ourselves. Is it really worth the money to buy ES? Should we just use WS?
Also, if you go and install some of those servers yourself on WS, then don't go crying to Red Hat if you run into problems with them. They'll politely decline to support your issue. If you want to save money by buying WS, then I can't stop you...just remember that you get what you pay for, and Red Hat will not budge on helping you out if your problem stems from a service that is not supported on WS.
CentOS looks very interesting. I wonder whether it is truely as reliable as RHEL. I will research more into it.
We really don't care much about Red Hat's support. We just want to have a reasonably fast and extremely stable Linux OS to work with. Since we have been using Redhat before, we prefer to continue to use RedHat. Its just that ES is very expensive...
If you don't want Redhat support, go with CentOS. Its basically just Redhat ES stripped of any thing that says Redhat along with logo's. It uses the same installer and everything.
Our office is thinking of using it on servers that won't need actual support, since Redhat has hiked their prices on ES and such.. If they continue at this rate, we're probably gonna start experimenting with Suse, use it instead.