Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Johnny Hughes
On 07/18/2012 04:45 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 mark and I wouldn't support Larry Ellison if I have any options
 Yeah, sticking it to the company that's developing and supporting open
 source GPL Java sounds sensible...
 *sarcasm*

 FC

No, java is not open source.  Didn't you know that the APIs are
patented.  You did see that Oracle sued Google for making a Derivative
work of java, right?  Open source is open source ... this suing people
for using open source to create derivative works is buillshit ...
however it is standard operating procedure for Oracle.

You did see the majority of the developers for OpenOffice jumped ship
and went to LibreOffice as soon as Sun was bought by Oracle, right?  Why
do you think that is?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Keith Roberts
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Johnny Hughes wrote:

 No, java is not open source.  Didn't you know that the APIs are
 patented.  You did see that Oracle sued Google for making a Derivative
 work of java, right?  Open source is open source ... this suing people
 for using open source to create derivative works is buillshit ...
 however it is standard operating procedure for Oracle.

So how does iced-tea fit into this picture?

Keith

---
Websites:
http://www.karsites.net
http://www.php-debuggers.net
http://www.raised-from-the-dead.org.uk

All email addresses are challenge-response protected with
TMDA [http://tmda.net]
---
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Johnny Hughes
On 07/19/2012 09:53 AM, Keith Roberts wrote:
 On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Johnny Hughes wrote:

 No, java is not open source.  Didn't you know that the APIs are
 patented.  You did see that Oracle sued Google for making a Derivative
 work of java, right?  Open source is open source ... this suing people
 for using open source to create derivative works is buillshit ...
 however it is standard operating procedure for Oracle.
 So how does iced-tea fit into this picture?

It fits in fine until Oracle decides that it wants to sue because they
think there is some money to be made. Then APIs are patentable, GPL does
not give patent permissions, etc.  The lawsuits will then fly.

If Android was not wildly popular, Oracle would not have done anything
about it.  Since it is, they want $$$.

If they think there is $$$ for them, they will pull the same thing again
in a heartbeat ... be it Java or MySQL or Berkley DB.  They gave up Open
Office to the Apache Foundation because of the mass exodus of
developers, or it would be in the same boat.  I just do not trust them.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread m . roth
Johnny Hughes wrote:
 On 07/19/2012 09:53 AM, Keith Roberts wrote:
 On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Johnny Hughes wrote:

 No, java is not open source.  Didn't you know that the APIs are
 patented.  You did see that Oracle sued Google for making a Derivative
 work of java, right?  Open source is open source ... this suing people
 for using open source to create derivative works is buillshit ...
 however it is standard operating procedure for Oracle.
 So how does iced-tea fit into this picture?

 It fits in fine until Oracle decides that it wants to sue because they
 think there is some money to be made. Then APIs are patentable, GPL does
 not give patent permissions, etc.  The lawsuits will then fly.

 If Android was not wildly popular, Oracle would not have done anything
 about it.  Since it is, they want $$$.

 If they think there is $$$ for them, they will pull the same thing again
 in a heartbeat ... be it Java or MySQL or Berkley DB.  They gave up Open
 Office to the Apache Foundation because of the mass exodus of
 developers, or it would be in the same boat.  I just do not trust them.

And then there's their hardware acquisition, Sun. Tech support for
hardware is what I refer to as self-abuse. Just don't buy it.

  mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:
 You did see the majority of the developers for OpenOffice jumped ship
 and went to LibreOffice as soon as Sun was bought by Oracle, right?  Why
 do you think that is?

Like in all events in History, there's two versions of events. Here's
Shuttleworth's
http://ho.io/libreoffice

It had to do with a faction's vocal opposition to the Sun Contributor
Agreement more than anything else.

Oh, and the freedom fighters at LO caused the killing of the
commercial build of OO.o, namely StarOffice (which ORCL had renamed
Oracle Open Office -sans the .org-, and developed in parallel with
OO.o, which, at the time of the fork, was at v3.4alpha).

Of course, that's standard procedure for MS-Novell... remeber they
were the first to fork OO.o with their Go-OO with patches to support
MS-OOXML (which Sun refused to include).

But we're drifting off-topic, I fear. Whatever floats your boat.
FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:
 If Android was not wildly popular, Oracle would not have done anything
 about it.  Since it is, they want $$.

Money is so evil! how they dare license a technology... even if it's
open source...
*sarcasm*

http://www.businessinsider.com/java-inventor-google-totally-slimed-sun-2012-4

Java Inventor: 'Google Totally Slimed Sun'
Matt Rosoff | Apr. 30, 2012, 12:38 PM

Java creator James Gosling thinks that Google totally slimed Sun by
using big parts of Java without paying a license, and says that he
agrees with Oracle in the lawsuit between the companies.

That may be a bit surprising, because Gosling quit his job at Sun
shortly after Oracle bought the company, and has been critical of
Oracle in some blog posts since then. Then, last March, Gosling took a
job at Google. He's since quit that job to work for a startup.

Gosling is widely considered the father of Java, as he invented the
first version of the Java language and other pieces of the platform
back in 1994.

On Saturday, Gosling wrote a brief blog post clarifying his position
on the Oracle-Google case after a news article got it wrong.

As he put it:

Just because Sun didn't have patent suits in our genetic code doesn't
mean we didn't feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in
this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun. We were
all really disturbed, even [then-CEO] Jonathan [Schwartz]: he just
decided to put on a happy face and tried to turn lemons into lemonade,
which annoyed a lot of folks at Sun.

FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:

 It fits in fine until Oracle decides that it wants to sue because they
 think there is some money to be made. Then APIs are patentable, GPL does
 not give patent permissions, etc.  The lawsuits will then fly.

You could make exactly that same argument about Linux, and probably on
better legal grounds except that SCO ran out of money before winning a
case - but somebody, somewhere must own those rights now.

Anyone can sue anyone else for anything.  At least in the Oracle/java
case there are some court decisions falling out that seem to limit the
potential damage.

 If they think there is $$$ for them, they will pull the same thing again
 in a heartbeat ... be it Java or MySQL or Berkley DB.  They gave up Open
 Office to the Apache Foundation because of the mass exodus of
 developers, or it would be in the same boat.  I just do not trust them.

The same risk applies to everything, opensource or not.   Someone can
always appear claiming to own a patent covering the functionality.  In
most opensource projects, no one checks, and even where they do it is
possible to have mistakes or differences of opinion.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
   lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Johnny Hughes
On 07/19/2012 10:17 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
 On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:
 If Android was not wildly popular, Oracle would not have done anything
 about it.  Since it is, they want $$.
 Money is so evil! how they dare license a technology... even if it's
 open source...
 *sarcasm*

 http://www.businessinsider.com/java-inventor-google-totally-slimed-sun-2012-4

 Java Inventor: 'Google Totally Slimed Sun'
 Matt Rosoff | Apr. 30, 2012, 12:38 PM

 Java creator James Gosling thinks that Google totally slimed Sun by
 using big parts of Java without paying a license, and says that he
 agrees with Oracle in the lawsuit between the companies.

 That may be a bit surprising, because Gosling quit his job at Sun
 shortly after Oracle bought the company, and has been critical of
 Oracle in some blog posts since then. Then, last March, Gosling took a
 job at Google. He's since quit that job to work for a startup.

 Gosling is widely considered the father of Java, as he invented the
 first version of the Java language and other pieces of the platform
 back in 1994.

 On Saturday, Gosling wrote a brief blog post clarifying his position
 on the Oracle-Google case after a news article got it wrong.

 As he put it:

 Just because Sun didn't have patent suits in our genetic code doesn't
 mean we didn't feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in
 this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun. We were
 all really disturbed, even [then-CEO] Jonathan [Schwartz]: he just
 decided to put on a happy face and tried to turn lemons into lemonade,
 which annoyed a lot of folks at Sun.


Then he also does not understand the GPL.

From the GPL Version 2 preamble:

Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents.
We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will
individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program
proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must
be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.

They made Java GPL, not me.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:
 
 Just because Sun didn't have patent suits in our genetic code doesn't
 mean we didn't feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in
 this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun. We were
 all really disturbed, even [then-CEO] Jonathan [Schwartz]: he just
 decided to put on a happy face and tried to turn lemons into lemonade,
 which annoyed a lot of folks at Sun.


 Then he also does not understand the GPL.

 From the GPL Version 2 preamble:

 Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents.
 We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will
 individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program
 proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must
 be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.

 They made Java GPL, not me.

You are oversimplifying things here.  The phone version of java was
never GPL'd. and that is the part that google reverse-engineered . On
the other hand, API's can't really be protected because they are two
sides of the same thing. If a user is allowed to use one side, someone
else has to be allowed to duplicate the other side.   Without that
concept, linux and the *bsds would never be allowed to duplicate the
unix APIs.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-19 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:

 No, java is not open source.

Yes it is.

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Johnny Hughes joh...@centos.org wrote:
 They made Java GPL

Yes, you finally understood. Thanks :)

http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7/
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/11/12Oracle-and-Apple-Announce-OpenJDK-Project-for-Mac-OS-X.html
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/l0mx0/twitter_joins_jcp_and_openjdk_project/
https://dev.twitter.com/blog/twitter-open-source-and-jvm
http://code.google.com/p/openjdk-osx-build/
OpenJDK for the Nokia N9 - MeeGo
http://labb.zafena.se/?p=532

But we're drifting topic. OK, let's leave it at that, you hate Oracle
and Ellison. Fine.

The OP asked about running Oracle kernel on CentOS, I told him it'd be
better to run the full Oracle Linux shebang to avoid any compatibility
issues or problems.

I prefer to run both CentOS and ORCL Linux on different machines for
different purposes. I don't have much more to say... ;)
FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread m . roth
Chris wrote:
 Hello CentOS Guys,

 What do you think about the Oracle Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel?

 Since Release 2 of the UEK Kernel, all updates are available free of
 charge  http://public-yum.oracle.com/

 My questions:
 Does the Oracle UEK kernel really perform better than the default centos
 kernel? Technical advantages and disadvantages?

 Would you use the Oracle UEK Kernel on centos?

Do you understand what OUL is, a modified version of RHEL? And no, I have
grave doubts you could use that kernel with the standard repositories for
CentOS: I'd give you a 95% confidence that trying to update most things
would give you tons of unsatisfied dependencies.

mark and I wouldn't support Larry Ellison if I have any options

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Clive Hills
No
Clive
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

 mark and I wouldn't support Larry Ellison if I have any options

Yeah, sticking it to the company that's developing and supporting open
source GPL Java sounds sensible...
*sarcasm*

FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Chris xchris...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Does the Oracle UEK kernel really perform better than the default centos 
 kernel?
 Technical advantages and disadvantages?

This answers some of your questions
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/servers-storage-admin/uek-rel2-getting-started-1555632.html

---
About the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel for Oracle Linux

Oracle Linux with the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel is Oracle's fully
supported, tested, and certified Linux operating system for the
enterprise. Oracle Linux is free to download, use, and distribute, and
it is optimized to run Oracle hardware, databases, and middleware. You
can obtain ISO images of the installation media from the Oracle
Software Delivery Cloud without charge (requires registration).

The Oracle Linux base distribution is 100% userspace-compatible with
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). However, the Unbreakable Enterprise
Kernel is released on an independent schedule and is always based on a
recent version of the mainline Linux kernel. As a result, it delivers
the latest innovations from mainline Linux, combined with tested
performance and stability. It is installed and booted by default;
major updates of the Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel are usually
published every 12 to 18 months.
---

However, I'd suggest that if you want to use Oracle' s kernel, you use
Oracle' s Linux distro, which you can also download for free.

Why come here and speak about mixing CentOS with Oracle kernel?. The
answers will surely be mostly negative (like going to a Fedora mailing
list and asking about using an Ubuntu kernel, or vice-versa). Do you
expect the answers to be otherwise?. Seems like trolling to me.

FC

-- 
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
- George Orwell
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread John R. Dennison
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 06:45:35PM -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 
  mark and I wouldn't support Larry Ellison if I have any options
 
 Yeah, sticking it to the company that's developing and supporting open
 source GPL Java sounds sensible...

This isn't the scientific linux users list and this type of thing isn't
going to go over any better here than it did there.  Oracle has a
well-earned bad reputation for their business practices in their
treatment of Redhat and their customers and people in this industry have
a long memory.  You like Oracle and appear to be a staunch supporter,
that's fine.  Just please don't expect the vast majority of subscribers
to this list to feel the same.






John
-- 
The ability to focus attention on important things is a defining
characteristic of intelligence.

-- Robert J. Shiller (1946-), American economist, academic, and author,
   Irrational Exuberance (2006)


pgpG1lmPH5Znt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Chris
2012/7/18  m.r...@5-cent.us:
 Do you understand what OUL is, a modified version of RHEL? And no, I have
 grave doubts you could use that kernel with the standard repositories for
 CentOS: I'd give you a 95% confidence that trying to update most things
 would give you tons of unsatisfied dependencies.

It is very easy without any dependencies to install.

You need only:

[ol6_UEK_latest]
name=Latest Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel for Oracle Linux $releasever
($basearch)
baseurl=http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/UEK/latest/$basearch/
gpgkey=http://public-yum.oracle.com/RPM-GPG-KEY-oracle-ol6
gpgcheck=1
enabled=1

--
Chris
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Chris
2012/7/18 John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 06:45:35PM -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 
  mark and I wouldn't support Larry Ellison if I have any options

 Yeah, sticking it to the company that's developing and supporting open
 source GPL Java sounds sensible...

 This isn't the scientific linux users list and this type of thing isn't
 going to go over any better here than it did there.  Oracle has a
 well-earned bad reputation for their business practices in their
 treatment of Redhat and their customers and people in this industry have
 a long memory.  You like Oracle and appear to be a staunch supporter,
 that's fine.  Just please don't expect the vast majority of subscribers
 to this list to feel the same.

I think they did a great job with btrfs and Oracle Linux for free.

--
Chris
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread John R. Dennison
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:03:47AM +0200, Chris wrote:
 
 I think they did a great job with btrfs and Oracle Linux for free.

Uh-huh.

OEL for free is a calculated move to poach yet more users from Redhat,
and in this specific instance, also _directly_ targeted at CentOS users.

btrfs on its own doesn't make up for a fraction of the ill-will they've
garnered in stealing users from Redhat by purposely undercutting Redhat
support costs.

Not only biting that hand that feeds you but tearing it off and then
beating you with it doesn't earn much good will.

Perhaps if they were actually putting out their _own_ distribution
instead of leeching off Redhat's work and then _making money off of it_
it perchance might be a different story.




John
-- 
Since every individual is accountable ultimately to the self, the formation
of that self demands our utmost care and attention.

-- A Bene Gesserit teaching spoken by Miles Teg in Chapterhouse: Dune
   by Frank Herbert


pgpSWJAAI3yze.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Chris
2012/7/18 Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com:

 Why come here and speak about mixing CentOS with Oracle kernel?. The
 answers will surely be mostly negative (like going to a Fedora mailing
 list and asking about using an Ubuntu kernel, or vice-versa). Do you
 expect the answers to be otherwise?. Seems like trolling to me.

No, it's not trolling!

I'm really interested in the technical differences and advantages.

--
Chris
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:09 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote:

 Perhaps if they were actually putting out their _own_ distribution
 instead of leeching off Redhat's work and then _making money off of it_
 it perchance might be a different story.

It's called free market competition.
It brings down costs for the consumer.

Sun took Novell's SuSE Enterprise Desktop for its short-lived Java
Desktop System (JDS) Linux.

As long as they comply with the GPL rules, it's all fair game.

FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Patrick Lists
On 19-07-12 00:34, Fernando Cassia wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:09 PM, John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com wrote:

 Perhaps if they were actually putting out their _own_ distribution
 instead of leeching off Redhat's work and then _making money off of it_
 it perchance might be a different story.

 It's called free market competition.

No it's not. It's called leeching.

 It brings down costs for the consumer.

Thanks for a good laugh. The only thing that will happen when companies 
switch from RHEL to Oracle's EOL is that they will get up-sold like 
there's no tomorrow and Larry  minions will take them for every penny  
first born they got.

 Sun took Novell's SuSE Enterprise Desktop for its short-lived Java
 Desktop System (JDS) Linux.

Iirc there was a commercial arrangement. You know the free market kind 
where money is paid for goods and services as in the opposite from leeching.

 As long as they comply with the GPL rules, it's all fair game.

Larry is that you?

Regards,
Patrick
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] Oracle UEK kernel on CentOS

2012-07-18 Thread Fernando Cassia
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Patrick Lists
centos-l...@puzzled.xs4all.nl wrote:
 Larry is that you?

ROFL... I use Fedora on desktops. Used Sun JDS before, and SuSE before
that. Caldera Openlinux 12 years ago. IBM OS/2 before that.

Today, one of my servers run CentOS. But when I plan to start some
commercial services on another server, I plan to purchase an Oracle
subscription plan because it´s one third of the RedHat price. Money
doesn´t grow on trees for me.

If ORCL gives me support and an optimized kernel, then fair game. Who
am I to complain?.

Oracle employees, on Evil Larry´s payroll, also contribute to the
Linux kernel and other linux areas as Gnome and drivers.

http://oss.oracle.com/

A simple google search shows ORCL employees on the Gnome mailing lists only:

http://goo.gl/Jv1kb

On the first screen
Dermot McCluskey (dermot.mccluskey@or*cle.com)
Calum Benson calum.benson@or*cle.com
Jeff Cai (jeff.cai@or*cle.com)
Li Yuan (lee.yuan@or*cle com)
Emily Chen  yang.chen@or*cle.com
Brian Cameron brian.cameron@or*cle.com
Mike Oliver mike.oliver@or*cle com

That sounds to me like contributing, not only leeching.

But hey, I guess the facts stopped being important long ago, and what
matters these days are perceptions and feelings, so it´s cool to hate
evil Larry. Must be why he did the revolutionary (and ahead of its
time) low cost ThinkNIC computer for educational markets based on
Linux and Netscape, 12 years ago.

And I´ll say it again: I run multiple OSs including Fedora, yet while
I support Oracle´s open source projects, I´m not particularly
interested in any of the firms´ non-free or propietary products geared
towards -and priced for- the Fortune 500...

There´s room for everyone in the market... RHEL, CentOS and Oracle Linux...
FC
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos