I apologise for the hiatus. My mailing list account's SMTP server seemed
to dislike me immensely (and it still does), and I patiently waited a
while for it to "fix itself" before bypassing it entirely and going with
my uni's SMTP service instead to send e-mail.

Ioannis Vranos wrote:
> I think there is not any difference in the installation procedure,
> apart from the RHN registration/activation.
There is no real difference apart from the above; plus you get some
colourful advertising!
>
> As far as I know, Fedora also provides yum, and thus I suppose Red Hat
> EL4 does too. So I think he can also use yum or even yumex. :-)
I would assume it does, but I last stopped using Red Hat at version 9,
and at the time up2date (and later Ximian's Red Carpet) were my updation
tools of choice. yum is convenient, but I won't miss it. I don't use
third-party repositories.
> Myself would also say to whoever asked, that Scientific Linux is a
> free Red Hat Enterprise Linux derivative, that is recompiled from
> source, and is actively maintained, and used in mission critical labs
> and facilities around the world.
>
> That is, it has enterprise-level stability (rock solid), it is free,
> has 24x7x365 errata, and they thoroughly test their errata a second
> time themselves before providing them. And no server downtimes.
>
>
> This means one can get some decent GNU/Linux distribution for free.
>
> Before adopting Red Hat EL, SL people were creating and providing
> their own rock-solid distribution in the past.

Thank you, I've noted all of this. At some point, I stopped harping on
it being free, as in 0 cost, because I had a feeling they were getting
the impression that my motivation here was to avoid the small fee toward
Red Hat's support.

Harish