Future (RPM based) linuxen: RHEL, FC, WBEL, Mandrake, SuSE?

[Bill Sconce]

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:54:49 -0400
Travis Roy <travis at scootz.net> wrote:

> > Buying Libranet gets you real Free Software, not the Creeping Proprietary
> > which has made RH, and others, increasingly unworkable.  Your interest may
> > vary, but Creeping Proprietary seems to have been an underlying thread here.
> > CP was the primary reason I decided to dump RH.  (I discovered afterward that
> > RPM Pain was a sufficient second.)
> 
> Please explain "Creeping Proprietary"?

For a couple of years I've been looking for a term to describe the phenomenon
which seems to surround some efforts to create a business model around or
associated with Free Software.  How to make a dollar, while trying to get
along with GPL.  (I don't say or think it's easy.)

What seems to happen is that the Old Model creeps back in.  "You need to buy
a license, er, subscription from us."  In the case of Red Hat, the kernel remains
GPL, and RH has contributed (and continues to contribute) massive amounts of
effort and code to Free Software.  (For example, the Cygwin suite.)  But Red
Hat has had its IPO, it has VCs who need to be repaid, it has stockholders.  So
the business model is under tremendous pressure.  And we see things like
subscriptions.  I have nothing against subscriptions, and Red Hat's target
customer base may well appreciate their evolving business model.  But it's at
odds with Free Software, and we see things like the creation of Fedora to fill
the vacuum resulting from the shift.  If you want a community process, might
as well jump all the way over to Debian.

Another example of a "community process", which has arguably suffered from the
shackles of a proprietary sponsor which just hasn't been able to "let go" would
be Java.  ("Creeping" probably doesn't apply to Java, where the conflict has
been going on since day one.  It's more appropriate to Red Hat, which did have
a history of Free/Libre.  An IPO seems to change everything...

 
> And I have to admit that RPMs were a pain until I installed apt from 
> freshrpms.net.. apt-get on Redhat rocks.

Indeed it does.  apt-get rocks, period.

 
> > C.  Libranet is easy to keep up to date.  I am no Debian guru, but Synaptic
> > and apt-get have made it a piece of cake.  Dependency Hell is a thing of
> > the past.  (Do stay away from dist-upgrade once you mix in from Testing and
> > Unstable.)
> 
> Doesn't not having dist-upgrade remove one of the best things about apt?

Depends on whether you need dist-upgrade.  Remember its original purpose.  In
the case where YOU (or a distributor such as Libranet) has pulled in things
from Testing and Unstable to get you more "up to date", the original purpose
(upgrading an entire distribution) doesn't apply.  I've never needed or
wanted it (because of the work the Libranet folks do for me.)  But bear in
mind that I do want, and have been using, later versions of certain packages,
and I've been using them ahead of their posting to Stable.

Actually, I've given a wrong answer.  Dist-upgrade ISN'T one of the best things
about apt.  Apt frees you from Dependency Hell.  It doesn't need to anything
else to be the "best".  Dist-upgrade is a frosting on the cake - for those who
need or want to have a certain, really large, class of apt-gets automated.

 
> > I don't know of anyone who has tried Libranet who has reported unfavorably.
> > There have been many _glowing_ reports, including some on this list.
> 
> I tried Libranet when it first came out and wasn't very impressed.

Hmm.  Maybe it wasn't very impressive when it first came out.  I've only been
using it since 1.9, three or four years.  (I apologize for being flip, but a
lot of things HAVE gotten a lot better with further development, and it pays
to keep having another look.  That's been my posture with Wine, which still
doesn't look ready, but what's the Free Software model about if not "better
with every release"?)


> But I am so used to RH that I will admit that at the time I was biased..

Sure.  Being used to something represents real reasons for preferences.  And
RH has done a lot of good.  (An argument could be made that their recent
actions are deplorable because they let down a faithful user base.)

If anyone can stand another flip comment, we have often accused Microsoft
customers of being used to their shackles, of being trapped by their biases.

> (Ben Scott will get this) I found Libranet like Debian but without the Debian.

I think I get it.  Ben??


> I did install a box with the new Sarge installer and that was 
> fantastic.. I didn't actually use the box much once it was installed, 
> but the installer is GREAT.

Well, that's encouraging to hear.  Installation of Debian has historically been
one of its not-great points.  Better and better with further development!

I'd still be using Libranet, however - remember that I want and use packages
which are not available in sarge, and it's a tremendous service for someone else
to do the mix-in of more bleeding-edge packages so I don't have to.

The OP was "what to do as RH keeps changing".  Libranet isn't the answer for
everyone, but it isn't sufficiently well known that there are alternaives to
RPM.

FWIW
-Bill