Mail Archives: opendos/2000/01/17/03:38:48
On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 06:15:52AM -0800, robert w moss wrote:
>
> I get the following from my reading in QUE v2.2 book:
> Since Caldera started out with Red Hat v2.1 in its Caldera Network
> Desktop
> and Red Hat used Caldera's money in its RPM packaging, which was also
> used by Caldera, there is a little confusion as to what is used by each
> company. Red Hat still uses the RPM packaging and desktop stuff from
> the old days and linuxconf along with a window manager called fvwm95,
> but Caldera has stopped using that RPM stuff (?) and is now using a
> character based , all-in-one system called LISA.
>
Hmm, something doesn't sound right. First off, the RPM packaging is
becoming something of a standard it seems and is used by RedHat, SuSE,
Mandrake (optimized Red Hat, sort of), OpenLinux, and TurboLinux.
There's now almost as many, if not more, stuff online as rpms than
tarballs it seems (at least in the case of binaries). :-(
Red Hat's default GUI is KDE(??), at least throughout the 6.x versions.
Fvwm95, being a rather old window manager, has pretty much been replaced
as a default window manager in various distros ever since KDE and GNOME
desktops have matured.
Caldera's LISA is not a package format so no, Caldera hasn't stopped
using the Red Hat Package Manager (RPM).
LISA is, if I'm not mistaken, just a character-based alternative to
their LIZARD GUI installation stuff. Nice to have an alternative if one
finds that LIZARD just isn't working right during installation.
> This may be why the major magazines evaluators say that Caldera is using
> Red Hat's distribution.
> I have read several recent Linux Evaluations in the Linux magazines which
> mention Caldera using the Red Hat distributions in their latest commercial
> versions (2.3).
> They also throw in Star Office and BRU in the commercial versions.
>
> It's food for thought though. Who is really doing what??
Yeah. I can understand one's confusion over this.
It's probably safe to say that several of the RPM-based distros
are essentially the same with the main difference being the installation
front-end.
OpenLinux was an Editor's Choice for `99 in Linux Journal. Why?
Not because it was any better or different than say Red Hat but because
of LIZARD. The installation/configuration stuff as well as a couple of
other goodies seem to be the only real difference between those distros.
But this is all IMHO as I have yet to ever install any of these.
I'm not really a fan of RPM.
--
>>ANIME SENSHI<<
Marc D. Williams
marcdw AT flash DOT net
http://www.oldskool.org/~tvdog/ -- DOS Internet & Tandy 1000
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Platform/8269/ -- Win3.x Makeover
- Raw text -