On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 12:29:03PM GMT, Tom H wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Raf Czlonka <r...@linuxstuff.pl> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 11:12:01PM GMT, Ismael Scalcon wrote: > >> > >> To clarify things up (ok, a bit off topic): > >> > >> Red Hat Linux is a commercial distro, but what they sell is the supporte > > > > To clarify things, Red Hat Linux _was_ a distro available as a free > > download with or without commercial support. > > > > What you are talking about is Red Hat _Enterprise_ Linux. > > Very true; "_was_" is the correct tense. But I was talking about RHL, > the distribution that RH published before moving to a RHEL/Fedora > model.
I know you were talking about RHL, I was replying to Ismael. > You can't get RHEL for free, even the "self-support" option has a yearly > cost... Yes, I'm aware of that. Rule of thumb: if it's free it's not RHEL. If free is what you're after: CentoOS, Fedora, etc. Hint: registered trademarks. Regards, -- Raf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111110132440.ga2...@linuxstuff.pl
