<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Linux Question in Operating System - Linux</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074008#M30134</link>
    <description>Hi Duffs,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;According to version chart - &lt;A href="https://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;there is no big difference between ES and AS versions. All base os file are located on CD1, so i dont think that any problem will arise later.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;regards,&lt;BR /&gt;ivan</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:24:43 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ivan Krastev</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2007-09-21T12:24:43Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Linux Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074006#M30132</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have downloaded RH4 for Titanium servers and have installed the first disk as ia64-AS version but accidently installed the remaining two cd's as ia64-ES versions. The install has been successful and the server has been up and running for some weeks now.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;However I am worried in case there are unforseen issues which may crop up later down the line. Has anyone any advise/experience with this?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;R,&lt;BR /&gt;D.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 04:07:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074006#M30132</guid>
      <dc:creator>Duffs</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-21T04:07:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Linux Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074007#M30133</link>
      <description>My understanding is that the two are just geared differently.  AS is geared more for applications (http, sendmail, samba and the like) and would only include rpm's for those applications and what would be needed for supporting those environments. ES is the enterprise version that includes everything. The complete installation is configured from the first disk so the additional disks being ES disk just had alot more software on them that wasn't needed.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I'm betting you won't have any problems at all.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:14:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074007#M30133</guid>
      <dc:creator>Glenn S. Davidson</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-21T11:14:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Linux Question</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074008#M30134</link>
      <description>Hi Duffs,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;According to version chart - &lt;A href="https://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;there is no big difference between ES and AS versions. All base os file are located on CD1, so i dont think that any problem will arise later.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;regards,&lt;BR /&gt;ivan</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:24:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/linux-question/m-p/4074008#M30134</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ivan Krastev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-09-21T12:24:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

