On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 10:14:47PM -0500, Mike Ross wrote: > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:54:16 +0200, Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > snip.. > >* A major one: the distro is not worth much without the patches. What > >you download from that server is nice for testing, but it is still not > >enough for production, because it lacks, say, the latest sendmail > >patch. So if you try to install this server in a production > >environment, it will either break, or will be broken-into. > > > >And remember that the license of SuSE basically forbids everybody else > >to compit with SuSE in providing patches. So you basically have to > >have a support contract with SuSE. > > How exactly does that work? What license terms do Suse impose on, for > instance, sendmail, in your example? I suspect the authors of sendmail > might be surprised to discover that Suse forbid them to provide patches... > > The only 'license of SuSE' that's involved (AFAIK) is the Yast license...
Who guarantees you that the next errata of SuSE won't be of a remote exploit caused/amplified by a problem in yast? Afterall, yast has scripts that manipulate other config files, right? -- Tzafrir Cohen +---------------------------+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---------------------------+
