Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Operating Systems Software Upgrades Linux

CentOS 5 Released 163

jonesy16 writes "Only a few weeks behind the release of Red Hat Enterprise 5, CentOS announced today the immediate release of version 5 of the free derivative of RHEL 5. Torrents are available for both i386 and x86_64. New features include compiz and AIGLX support as well as better virtualization and thin-client support. Package updates include Apache-2.2, kernel-2.6.18, Gnome-2.16, and KDE-3.5."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CentOS 5 Released

Comments Filter:
  • I'm a big fan of the servercd version, containing just the bare minimum for a server installation and really hope the developers will produce one even for version 5.
    Centos rocks!!!

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by morcego ( 260031 )
      The ServerCD version of CentOS always take some time to show up.

      That said, you can do a bare minimum install with CentOS 5 CD1 these days easily enough. Just select custom install, and deselect all package groups.
  • Pirates! (Score:5, Funny)

    by vivaoporto ( 1064484 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @03:52AM (#18715323)

    Torrents are available for both i386 and x86_64.

    OMG, pirates!! I'm sooo calling the BSA.
  • by Werrismys ( 764601 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @05:14AM (#18715705)
    Debian is best for running non-commercial stuff on, but for most HP stuff and VMware server etc (that officially support RHEL4) CentOS is the way to go. The server install (single CD with all the stuff you need) rules, hope they make one for CentOS5 soon.

    When installing for example VMware Server, all the stuff one needs is already in. Even the kernel modules load without any recompiling.
    • by Dalroth ( 85450 )
      That's pretty funny. I just installed Debian AMD64 on an HP machine this week as a host OS to another instance of Debian AMD64 running under VMWare. I had no problems at all. Everything just worked.

      So, do tell me, what's the problem running VMWare on Debian?

      • by C_Kode ( 102755 )
        In your house where the only critical thing you probably have is your porn is fine, when your companies business is on the line. Well, you wouldn't be working for me if you used an unsupported OS for a critical application... I use both RHEL and CentOS. (because they are the same and make management/documentation that much easier) If I'm installing Oracle, it's going on RHEL. If I'm installing LAMP or an SMTP/IMAP server, it's going on CentOS.
        • Plenty of people [] are willing to take your money to support Debian for you, if that's what you want.
        • by Dalroth ( 85450 )
          That's also funny. Given that this is the primary database server for my employer. Who would've thought you'd want to build a business around Debian and Postgres? We must be doing something wrong, because it's working out very well for us and we don't need to pay for support.

          Anyway, where does Oracle come into the picture? The original poster was talking about Debian, HP and VMWare. I see no mention of Oracle anywhere.

          • by C_Kode ( 102755 )
            I suppose if you are running the free VMWare server it's probably not a critical application in the first place as the free VMWare is very limited in it's abilities compared to ESX. I certainly wouldn't be running my most critical database on the free vmware. Oracle or PostgreSQL.

            Btw, I use PostgreSQL also. Oracle has it's place, and PostgreSQL has it's place. RAC is a beautiful thing.
  • City manager of Tuttle decries more sophisticated attacks against his website, threatening legal ramifications against hacker terror networks who have targetted him for termination.
  • by Mark_in_Brazil ( 537925 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @08:49AM (#18716961)
    Dear CentOS developers,

    Please stop hacking my browser. When I visit my favorite site, Slashdot, your software's name keeps appearing on my browser. If you don't stop this at once, I will be forced to call the FBI and report your hacking.

    Thank you.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      FIX IT NOW!!~!!!! THIRD NOTICE!~!

      This line is just to make slashdot's lameness filter accept all the caps I just typed. Please ignore it.
  • Cool (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jimbo God of Unix ( 221452 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @08:52AM (#18716995) Homepage
    Does that make it NickelOS?
  • Why is there any functional difference between CentOS and RHEL? There are different HowTos for installation and operation of various SW on each of RHEL and CentOS. And how about a script that will convert either CentOS or Fedora to look exactly like RedHat for installing/running apps?
    • by ePhil_One ( 634771 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @09:57AM (#18717705) Journal
      The only functional difference between the two is the removal of the RedHat name and logo from all packages. redhat-config-network becomes system-config-network, etc; the rest is all artwork.

      Fedora is a whole other beast. While Fedora rpms will often run fine on a RHEL system (and RHEL5 makes many of the FC6 packages available as unsupported extras), its goal is to be much faster moving and bleeding edge, at the cost of reliability and long term support.

      • by Sketch ( 2817 )

        The only functional difference between the two is the removal of the RedHat name and logo from all packages. redhat-config-network becomes system-config-network, etc; the rest is all artwork.


        redhat-config-* was renamed to system-config-* by Fedora. This change propogated downstream to RHEL for RHEL4, which was the first RHEL release based on Fedora (RHEL3 was based on RedHat 9).

      • There's also RedHat support: while their user-grade support is fairly sad compared to Google and the CentOS community, it's handy if you're running big iron with 99.9999% service level agreements and you need someone to blame when things fail. Notice I didn't say someone to fix it: I said someone to blame. In turn, installing third-party software such as libdvdcss from off-shore repositories in order to view DVD's is something that RedHat can say "we don't support that", and you're thrown back on your own.

  • Direct download of the i386 DVD version is available at: DVD/ []

    By tomorrow the x86_64 DVD version will be available at: n-DVD/ []

    I'm trying out a new webhosting provider and am curious how they perform. Comments welcome.

Each new user of a new system uncovers a new class of bugs. -- Kernighan