[Gloucs] Re: [SB] Redhat 9 binary

[Francis Barton]

Quoting Roy M <Roy at Farm3.demon.co.uk>:

> Thank you Aaron & Sean for your advice. I will have a ramble round 
> before I buy the update.
> Roy

The following link might also be of interest to wearers of the Hat:
http://www.serverwatch.com/news/print.php/3350491

Francis

> In message 
> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405052258450.4512-100000 at acws-0051.cs.bham.ac.uk>, Aaron 
> Sloman <A.Sloman at cs.bham.ac.uk> writes
> >On Wed, 5 May 2004, Roy M wrote:
> >
> >> I bought a Linux mag [don't know when there is no date on it, issue 33]
> >> anyway, on the front was a free Redhat ver 9 binary.

> >> What I would like to know is, has anyone installed the redhat 9 binary
> >> and followed it up with a full prog purchase, if so did it install OVER
> >> the binary ? or does the binary have to be uninstalled first!

> >If you try to get a full RH 9 (e.g. from www.maxtux.co.uk or
> >www.linuxemporium.co.uk, or from www.creativechanges.uklinux.net or from
> >a friend who already has it) then when you install it from the CD you
> >can specify that it is an upgrade, in which case it will install over
> >the version you already have. you'll get options as to what you want to
> >have installed, and it may or may not fit into the space you have
> >already allocated on the hard drive for RH9.

> >Many people will now advise you to go for Fedora instead (the 'free'
> >successor to RH 9), but I have no experience of it. See
> >    http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/
> >
> >I don't know if the suppliers listed above still provide RH 9.
> >
> >Aaron