On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 10:50:37PM -0700, T. Nifty Hat Mitchell wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 06:20:10PM -0700, Craig White wrote: > .... > > > By stripping down the initial install we can fokus on making Fedora better > > > and we can actually implement some of the suggestions on this list. Being > > > based on Fedora it should be easy to add additional components as required, > > > something like a minimal install and add what you need. > > ---- > > your fondness or lack thereof of edge / release scheduled distributions > > is noted but not of interest to fedora. Production servers really should > > be on 'stable' which is what you want. White Box is what you want...RHEL > > for free. I would encourage them to use RHEL but if they want stable for > > free...this is the ticket. > > > > http://www.whiteboxlinux.org/ > > > > whiteboxlinux, Tao and Centos Linux... > > Think clearly about using a parasitic distribution that takes the source > of a supported product and deprives the primary support organization > of it's beer money. ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/3/en/os/i386/SRPMS ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/updates/enterprise/3AS/en/os/SRPMS RedHat allows this, so it must feel that either it gains on doing this, or it isn't losing much (it decided against RH Linux and moved to Fedora for *some* reasons). WhiteBox compiles and packages a distribution that is worthwhile to the community, for nothing. How is it being parasitic? > If you cannot afford RHEL at the list price call and beg. Then do what > has to be done. I paid for RHN in RHL 9 days, when I had a part time job. Now, I can't afford RHEL at any price, as my money isn't mine to spend on how I choose. If I'm intelligent enough to support some linux systems by my own, and I'm only interested in security updates, freely available from redhat, how can I justify such expense? But I'm trying to get the university department to get a subscription, at least for the Linux Investigation Group here (http://gil.di.uminho.pt/). But money is running low around here. And I'm talking about the education subscription, imagine AS at full price for a couple of machines. > > If you like the added value and twiddle that the secondary packaging > folks add then sure. > > And yes "parasitic distribution" is a bit loaded. If you can operate > in a symbiotic way to the "community" on a secondary distribution have > at it (IMO). > > In many ways that is what RH is doing. They are symbiotic in this > GPL, opensource, GNU, Linux world we are in. > > Free as in speech not as in beer, an interesting concept. But still free to resell or give away. Regards, Luciano Rocha
