FC4 or FC5

[Uno Engborg]

Benton W Middleton wrote:
> bruce <bedouglas <at> earthlink.net> writes:
>
>   
>> why do you suggest fc5?
>>
>> at the same time, what version of rhel is the latest?
>>
>> is there a way to get a the source srpms for rhel? or should one take a look
>> at centos?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> -bruce
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: fedora-list-bounces <at> redhat.com
>> [mailto:fedora-list-bounces <at> redhat.com]On Behalf Of Rex Dieter
>> Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 1:32 PM
>> To: fedora-list <at> redhat.com
>> Subject: Re: FC4 or FC5
>>
>> bruce wrote:
>>     
>>> given the state of things right now.. should someone use FC4 of go ahead
>>>       
>> and
>>     
>>> go to FC5?
>>>       
>> FC5.
>>
>>     
>>> also, can someone who's knowlegable tell me which version of RHEL is
>>> comparable to FC4 and/or FC5?
>>>       
>> The latest, RHEL4 is actually closest to FC3.
>>
>>     
>
>
> ---------------Reply---------------
>
> RHEL_4 is closest to FC3, and maybe 4. Their guide is - - work on CURRENT Fedora
> goes into NEXT RHEL version. Centos keeps up with CURRENT RHEL, but does not
> offer support, as does RedHat. As for choosing between FC4 & FC5, FC4 is more
> stable, except with "Xen", the VM software. FC5 has ver_3.0 which will even let
> you host MS Windows on top of Linux. Those are basically the choices you have in
> that area.
>             - -  Benster! - - 
>
>   
If I'm not mistaken, running windows on Xen 3.0 will require a brand new 
processor that have
hardware support for this. As far as I know these processors haven't hit 
the mass market yet.

Regards
Uno Engborg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3271 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060611/167d3097/attachment-0001.bin>