On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 14:41 -0600, Christofer C. Bell wrote: > On 2/23/06, Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > there are some things that you aren't considering... > > > > 1 - Red Hat isn't required to put all their SRPM's on the net - free for > > download, they only need to provide the SRPM's to purchasers and that > > could be via other methods...it's simply the method that they are > > choosing. > Thanks, Craig, for your insight. This here is something I'll have to > give some thought to, and could very well change my opinion. In > essence, by doing this, Red Hat Software is saying, "here's our source > code. If you want to rebuild RHEL, knock yourselves out." This is > the only counterpoint I've seen posted here that I feel has some > weight worth considering. I believe CentOS is also available for more platforms, such as Sparc, which RedHat is no longer supporting. That is also a non-trivial undertaking. The Aurora project is working on a Fedora based Sparc distribution. > -- > Chris > > "I trust the Democrats to take away my money, which I can afford. I > trust the Republicans to take away my freedom, which I cannot." > -- Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 | mhw@xxxxxxxxxxxx /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
