Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4: An overview
Share
Print
CommentsWhat's new in v4
Red Hat lists very few specific additions to Enterprise Linux 4:
- The 2.6 Linux kernel has replaced the heavily patched and modified Red Hat 2.4 kernel, providing better scalability and expanded hardware support
- SELinux security enhancements
- Desktop software upgrades and additions: GNOME 2.8, OpenOffice.org, Novell Evolution, RealPlayer, Acrobat Reader
- Integration with Active Directory authentication; also includes a Microsoft Exchange connector
- EAL4+ certification pending
The list is a bit light. Considering Red Hat's zeal in backporting code from the 2.6 kernel to its own edition of 2.4, there is little left to be excited about in moving to 2.6 -- many of the features that made 2.6 a better choice have already been implemented in RHEL3.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 includes the SELinux subsystem, which has been integrated with a dozen outward-facing services, including BIND, NTP, and Apache. This allows for policy-based mandatory access controls, which allows a finer control over user privileges.
The desktop software upgrades and additions are good for the Desktop and Workstation editions of RHEL4, but are utterly useless and somewhat of a liability on the AS and ES editions. Fortunately the software selection section of the Anaconda installer allows for fine-grained control over package installation. Cosmetically, the traditional BlueCurve theme for GNOME has been modified to match the one in Fedora Core 3; instead of the KDE-like menu interface, the standard GNOME top/bottom menu and taskbar split has been preserved. Some feel that this provides enhanced usability, but it may also provide an upgrade hassle for users accustomed to the old BlueCurve style.
RHEL4 is supposed to have better hardware support than previous editions, but it fared poorly with our standard test machines. While Red Hat Enterprise Linux was designed to work primarily with mass-market workstations and servers based on standard configurations, it should still work on custom computers like the ones we tested it with. The first system, based on an Intel D915GUX motherboard, refused to install properly on a serial ATA hard drive -- the ICH6R RAID controller was not properly supported. On our AMD64 test system based on an MSI K82 Neo2-FIR motherboard, we had some success with RAID arrays using both onboard controllers during installation. Despite being recognized by Anaconda, the boot loader hung when it came time for the first boot after installation. This is not the first time we've seen this SATA problem, but it's been around for so long that it seems ridiculous that Red Hat did not discover and address it during their testing process.
Outgunning the competition?
Red Hat's primary commercial competition in the corporate operating system market comes from Novell (a la SUSE Linux Enterprise Server and Novell Linux Desktop), Sun Microsystems (with Java Desktop System and Solaris 10), and Mandrakesoft (with its new Corporate Server and Desktop distributions). How do they compare?
Red Hat's main advantage over its competition is its diversity. Red Hat Enterprise Linux comes in four varieties: Advanced Server, Enterprise Server, Workstation, and Desktop. Each is customized for specialized purposes, but all are based on the same core. This ensures that customers have a variety of tools for a variety of tasks, rather than try to make one software solution fit all uses and machines.
Red Hat lacks integrated virtualization features like those found in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 and Solaris 10, and it's more than three times the price of the comparably featured Mandrakelinux Corporate Server 3.0. But Red Hat's most dangerous competition may not be from outside companies, but from its own community distribution. We won't do an in-depth comparison with these distros, as their usefulness is dependent on your specific situation, preference, training, and infrastructure. Red Hat Enterprise Linux has been and continues to be a valid choice for pretty much any use you can throw at it. Whether it is the most cost-effective solution for your machines is a decision you'll have to make on your own.
Summary
In all, we found Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 to be somewhat of a mediocre improvement to an already competent product line. It feels more like an update pack to RHEL3 than it does a full version upgrade.
RHEL4 will be free to Red Hat Network subscribers, but we don't think it's revolutionary enough to get people to switch from other operating systems -- at least, it's not any more revolutionary than it has ever been.
| Purpose | Operating system |
| Manufacturer | Red Hat Inc. |
| Architectures | i386, IA64, AMD64/EM64T, IBM zSeries, S/390 series, and POWER series |
| License | GNU General Public License |
| Market | Enterprise computing, from desktops up to high-end servers |
| Price (retail) | Varies dependent on edition and subscription length |
| Previous version | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 |
| Product Web site | Click here |
Comments
on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4: An overviewNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
2.4 is still the choice for a stable server als 2.6 is still kind of beta, whatever kernel.org tries to suggest<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) At least with all the stuff RedHat shoved into their Fedora Core Kernel<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
And as you can see with 2.6.11 RedHat still shoves more beta or nsa-backdoor-enabled linux stuff like the wannabe security solution execshield in there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
Let's talk about Linux distributions in particular. The 2.6 kernel is clearly the place to be in terms of functionality, robustness, security, and future development. However, a lot has changed behind the scenes, the device driver interface in particular. So it's a serious amount of work for a distribution to bring itself up to the new kernel. If RHEL came out with a new release with no other changes whatsoever, it would still be a significant step forward.
The reviewer evidently doesn't understand this basic consequence of kernel design, so what follows is really no surprise. Never mind that the "standard" test environment used in the review doesn't seem to be particulary standard at all -- no justification is offered for its particular choice of hardware being representative, let alone standard, within the industry. The point is that hardware vendors have to release drivers compatible with Linux 2.6, or they have to be developed independently, and then these drivers have to find their way into various distributions.
A review which conducted an objective study of hardware compatibility among Linux distributions would be welcome. This review doesn't even touch the subject.
Likewise, a review which compared security benchmarks across Linux distributions would be of great benefit to everyone concerned with the principle of security by default.
In fact, any review which objectively measures some characteristic of interest across distributions creates a useful point of reference for both the industry and end users. Let's see more of those, and less of this opinionated fluff!
Suse<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/apparently/ supports this but when I click the option on both 9.1 and 9.2 it just plain didn't work. I had to hack config files manually to make to work. The MS admins wouldn't be too impressed by having to do that.
So I'm definitely going to have a look a EL4 for this reason alone. Let's hope it does what it says on the box...
RHEL 4 :
- SeLinux (big piece)
- ext3 reservation
- ext3 resize online
- Gnome 2.8
- KDE 3.3
- hal/G-V-M
- cups via dbus
- GFS
Solaris/Novell/Mandrake does not provides these features.
> it's more than three times the price of the comparably featured Mandrakelinux Corporate Server 3.0.
Mandrakelinux CS : 0 (nada) certification.
RHEL : many (Oracle, Dell, IBM,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).
http://store.mandrakesoft.com/product_info.php?pr<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> ducts_id=195
Number of CD for Mdk CS : 2 (!)
RHEL : 4 (binary) + 4 (source) + 1 ("extra")
Mandrake CS available for : x86 x86_64
RHEL : x86 x86_64 ia64 ppc s390 s390x
Price Mandrake :
329 or 729 € / year (subscription like RHEL)
Price RHEL :
from 70 to 18 000 $ / year (but RHEL ws = 179, ES = 349).
Where you see it's "more than three times the price" of Mdk CS ?
> But Red Hat's most dangerous competition may not be from outside companies, but from its own community distribution.
"Funny".
You do not understand what Fedora is nor RHEL :
http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html
- SeLinux (big piece):
http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/code/download0.cfm
- ext3 reservation
- ext3 resize online
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6
- Gnome 2.8
http://www.gnome.org
- KDE 3.3
http://www.kde.org
- hal/G-V-M
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software_2fhal
- cups via dbus
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software_2fdbus
- GFS
http://sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
To me it looks like they have more that that.
Suse linux enterprise server:
- ~400 euros one year, two cpus
- x86/amd64/emt64architectures
- reiserfs (faster than ext3)
- reiserfs online resizing
- ext3 (with online resizing)
- xfs
- jfs
- acl
- drbd
- postfix
- 3 filesystem permissions level (easy, secure, paranoid)
- HA
- SELinux (parts of it)
- 2.6 kernel
- ipsec tools
- ssl certificate management
- ldap user management
- dns/dhcp management tools
- automated installation
- multi configuration (scpm) makes it possibile to switch between different configuration with a single command
- cups
- excellent hw support
- LVM
- Firewall suitable for simple networks (even with dmz)
- excellent configuration tool (yast) that can be run in graphical or console mode, for exmaple over ssh
And I did not even mention office software, as I use SLES for servers only, so I definitely do not care about having OO, latest gnome.
Regards
I work for a large Telco... and in this space RHEL is god... when rolling DB2 or Oracle... you don't touch anything else in EL.
A review on the changes involved at 3rd party drivers would have been interesting...
Realistically... I've found this review at <A HREF="http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/5745/" title="linuxplanet.com">LinuxPlanet</a linuxplanet.com> a far better review.... it covers more of what's in it, and what to expect. This review on NewsForge seems rushed and pre-judged.
Also the whole RAID card<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... please... in Enterprise world... you throw 'em out and get cards that *ARE* supported... it's definately not a show stopper... you failed to mention what *DID* work...
Sure SuSE is reasonable in the EL space... but it still has to 'prove' itself (against that of RedHat), and Mandrake is pretty much a joke in this space.
For me... new compiler (GCC 3.4), *REAL* Kernel 2.6, SELinux, and SATA, MySQL 4.1, Postgres 7.4 make it a reasonable upgrade.
I would have liked an option for PHP5..<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.but I can live without it... I'll compile it up myself.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
Mandrake is pretty much a joke in this space.
I pointed this out recently as well as them going bankrupt and a few Mandrake people tried to plea their case. Original CEO is back and so on (I guess that means he can bankrupt it again though I'm sure he had nothing to do with the first one...). They probably think OJ was innocent too.
SuSE 9.2 - I haven't been able to get it to load on ANYTHING! VMWare, stock Dell (smp desktop), generic AMD, anything. Comes up, starts to install and kablewy (big red box (ironic they used a "red" box eh? At least it wasn't shaped like a hat.), hardware error it says)! Got the "professional" version, same thing. Then they have the nerve to criticize RedHat. At least SuSE 9.1 worked.
LSB 2.0 :
http://www.osf.org/homepage-items/c107.htm
And I know they have some more...
4 - Selectable I/O evevators
AD Integration
Disk I/O improvements
LVM2
Support for multi-core CPU's
SELinux
The list goes on. Obviously, your overlooking details that are "under the hood".
All of these improvements are in the kernel. You change the kernel and voila you've got the functionality.
Look guys, this is Linux - not some Windows vs Novell or Solaris vs AIX deal. Redhat's touting support for PPC but the work for PPC is being done by SuSE and Yellowdog. Anybody can take any peice of software in the Linux space and claim that they have these features but doesn't preclude competitors from gaining those features as well.
So if you're a SuSE/Mandrake/Ubuntu shop, fear not, you can get the peices for LVM2, SEL, Multicore CPU by just downloading from www.kernel.org and other related websites.
Redhat's trying to be like Microsoft, spread the word that ONLY they have these features in their Linux kernel - B-F-D!.
If Redhat wants to show their "PROPRIETARY" spots, perhaps they should go FreeBSD or NetBSD and then they'll be able to control their destiny.
a) applying certain patches to the kernel (eg. SeLinux)
and
b) configuring it in a useful fashion out of the box.
Yes you can fix any distro to do all this stuff, you can even fix a RedHat 5.0 distro to do this -- or you can do it all yourself from scratch.
What's the point if somebody will put it togeather for you the way you want it allready?
The first system, based on an Intel D915GUX motherboard, refused to install properly on a serial ATA hard drive<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....
This is no surprise, since the reviewer attempted to install a SERVER operating system on a DESKTOP board. I haven't checked, but I'll bet that Intel hasn't validated this OS on that board.
He needs to try it with server boards, and in the case of Intel, he needs to wait until Intel has validated the OS with its boards. This will take some time, since Intel doesn't start the validation process until an OS is released.
Disclaimer: I work for Intel, but nothing I say here should be construed as an official statement. Futher disclosure: I also occasionally write OS reviews for Newsforge.
I've never had problems installing RH or FC on a PC before - including systems w/ RAIDs.
Unfortunately, this is not true for my new Dell. Neither RH4 nor FC3 has drivers for it's SATA drives.
Furthermore, the FC3 DVD iso lasks a driver for Dell's DVD drive.
So much for Dell/RH cooperation.
Here's a secret, you don't need vendor support to run Linux, in fact, your probably better off without it. Don't buy what you don't need.
Looks like its time for me to get another hard drive and finally ditch RH9 in favor of something that gets patches.
Definitely<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... RHEL4 has more<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
I made my Fedroa C3 DVD from CD ISO'sI got with a magazine by using this script here.
http://www.linuxcompatible.org/story23334.html
and now i am going to try it on RHEL4 CD ISO and the script works.
RHEL4 CD or DVD
-Anyone with problems with RHEL3/4 on Intel 865 based mobos? Integrated SATA controller extremely unstable, works perfectly with PATA.
RHEL4 for some reason omitted the "services" icon... extremely useful...
Many impressive security improvements in RHEL 4
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 19, 2005 08:06 AM<A HREF="http://www.redhat.com/apps/webform.html?event_type=whitepaper&eid=367" title="redhat.com">http://www.redhat.com/apps/webform.html?event_typ<nobr>e<wbr></nobr> =whitepaper&eid=367</a redhat.com>
RHEL 3 is practically unusable on all our server, due to RedHat's patches.
Many other people have been experiencing the same problem (slow throughput, high IO wait loads).
Recently i purchased a intel Duo Core machine . My machine already installed with Windows Xp. Now i want to install RHEL 5.0. But its asking for Drivers files . My HDD IS SATA.. From Where i can down load the driver files... Please Help meeeeeeeeeeeee.
Thankssssss
Bala
Biased Opinion?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 15, 2005 12:45 AMThe undertones of the article clearly demonstrate this author does not care for Red Hat products in the least.
#