Hi,
Is using Red Hat site for documentation legal?
If I understand correctly you have to be a customer of Red Hat to be allowed to use their bandwidth: https://access.redhat.com/help/terms/
"2. Terms Applicable to Red Hat Content. In order to access a Red Hat Portal and Red Hat Content, you must be a current Customer of Red Hat or its affiliates [.......] "Some Red Hat Content may have additional terms, license agreements, privacy terms, export terms, subscription agreements, or other terms and conditions ("Additional Terms") that apply to your access to or use of the applicable Red Hat Content. In the event of a conflict, inconsistency, or difference between these Terms of Use and the Additional Terms, the Additional Terms will control. [........] 6. Use of Content. Red Hat grants you a personal, non-assignable license to use Red Hat Content for your own internal use while you are a Red Hat Customer (as defined in Section 2 above). Distributing any portion of Red Hat Content to a third party, using any Red Hat Content for the benefit of a third party, or using Red Hat Content in connection with software other than Red Hat Software under an active Red Hat subscription are all prohibited. Red Hat authorizes you to display on your computer, download, play, and print the Red Hat Content provided: (a) the copyright notice is not removed, (b) Red Hat Content is not be altered, (c) Red Hat Content is used only for your personal, educational, and non-commercial use in support of your active valid subscriptions to Red Hat products and services and in accordance with your Customer Agreement, (d) you do not further redistribute or copy Red Hat Content, and (e) you comply with any Additional Terms. In the event of a conflict, inconsistency, or difference between this Section 6 and the terms of a License or Customer Agreement, the License or Customer Agreement will control (for example, for Red Hat Content licensed under a Creative Commons License, you will have the rights set forth in the applicable Creative Commons License)."
---------------------------
The way I understand it, most RHEL documentation has a more permissive license, like CC-BY-SA: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ and can be redistributed under certain conditions. However, the terms of use still apply to using the Red Hat websites (=bandwidth).
But if someone is a Red Hat customer, he can legally access the site, fetch the documentation and redistribute it to everyone.
Since RHEL and CentOS are now collaborating, can they sort out this issue?
Thanks,
Adrian Buciuman
On 07/30/2014 08:38 AM, Adrian Buciuman wrote:
<snipping>
--
The way I understand it, most RHEL documentation has a more permissive license, like CC-BY-SA: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ and can be redistributed under certain conditions. However, the terms of use still apply to using the Red Hat websites (=bandwidth).
But if someone is a Red Hat customer, he can legally access the site, fetch the documentation and redistribute it to everyone.
This is best asked of lawyers, and I'm betting many of the folks who chime in here won't have passed the bar. *MY* understanding (IANAL) is that you may redistribute the documentation so long as you follow the CC-BY-SA license.
Since RHEL and CentOS are now collaborating, can they sort out this issue?
We've been discussing this previously with the RH folks. The issue is that we want to change the documentation (we don't do entitlements, subscriptions, etc). In altering the documentation, we must then make other changes as required by the license, but the source used to generate the docs isn't available in most cases.
We've not had the free cycles deal with the html edits and keep up with it. Oracle uses the pdf copies of the docs rather than changing things, but a pdf in a browser isn't exactly 'nice'.
Patches welcome.
This only can be said about the portion of their website that requires username and password to access. Everything else (such as Documentation) appears to be put out by them into public domain (that is you do not have to agree to any terms when you enter the documentation portion of their website), and therefore documentation can be used by anybody. This does not include copying portion of that documentation and posting it elsewhere (which separate - copyright - notice covers, I meant to say prohibits).
On a side note. RedHat as a commercial company that lives off open source (mostly GNU licensed) software. And they to the best of my knowledge are very good at following the terms of the license(s) themselves. That is: they put out into public domain (make accessible) source RPMs and patches. Exactly as GNU license requires them to. That, BTW, is why CentOS exists quite legally. And even though I'm using CentOS on all workstations in the Department and on several older servers (introduction and philosophy of RHEL 7 made it clear that new servers will definitely be not CentOS 7, - FreeBSD most likely), I feel no shame or feeling that I'm ripping off RedHat. They do great job. They are paid by their customers for that. Our University maintains contract with them. But in case of emergency, you will faster go through to a solution if you are not going through some pilot server, but can get necessary stuff directly (RHEL vs CentOS + maintaining official CentOS public mirror in your server room).
Thanks. Valeri
On Wed, July 30, 2014 8:38 am, Adrian Buciuman wrote:
Hi,
Is using Red Hat site for documentation legal?
If I understand correctly you have to be a customer of Red Hat to be allowed to use their bandwidth: https://access.redhat.com/help/terms/
"2. Terms Applicable to Red Hat Content. In order to access a Red Hat Portal and Red Hat Content, you must be a current Customer of Red Hat or its affiliates [.......] "Some Red Hat Content may have additional terms, license agreements, privacy terms, export terms, subscription agreements, or other terms and conditions ("Additional Terms") that apply to your access to or use of the applicable Red Hat Content. In the event of a conflict, inconsistency, or difference between these Terms of Use and the Additional Terms, the Additional Terms will control. [........] 6. Use of Content. Red Hat grants you a personal, non-assignable license to use Red Hat Content for your own internal use while you are a Red Hat Customer (as defined in Section 2 above). Distributing any portion of Red Hat Content to a third party, using any Red Hat Content for the benefit of a third party, or using Red Hat Content in connection with software other than Red Hat Software under an active Red Hat subscription are all prohibited. Red Hat authorizes you to display on your computer, download, play, and print the Red Hat Content provided: (a) the copyright notice is not removed, (b) Red Hat Content is not be altered, (c) Red Hat Content is used only for your personal, educational, and non-commercial use in support of your active valid subscriptions to Red Hat products and services and in accordance with your Customer Agreement, (d) you do not further redistribute or copy Red Hat Content, and (e) you comply with any Additional Terms. In the event of a conflict, inconsistency, or difference between this Section 6 and the terms of a License or Customer Agreement, the License or Customer Agreement will control (for example, for Red Hat Content licensed under a Creative Commons License, you will have the rights set forth in the applicable Creative Commons License)."
The way I understand it, most RHEL documentation has a more permissive license, like CC-BY-SA: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ and can be redistributed under certain conditions. However, the terms of use still apply to using the Red Hat websites (=bandwidth).
But if someone is a Red Hat customer, he can legally access the site, fetch the documentation and redistribute it to everyone.
Since RHEL and CentOS are now collaborating, can they sort out this issue?
Thanks,
Adrian Buciuman _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:07 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
..... And even though I'm using CentOS on all workstations in the Department and on several older servers (introduction and philosophy of RHEL 7 made it clear that new servers will definitely be not CentOS 7, - FreeBSD most likely), ....
May I ask why your servers are leaving the Red Hat environment?
Thank you.
Oh, boy. Now I have to rant on Linux and RedHat after being so happy with them for much longer than a decade. OK, the first thing I have to admit: I'm ignorant person. Please teach something...
Now questions:
1. How often do you reboot your Linux servers? (every about 45 days there is either kernel or glibc update. I remember somewhere about RedHat 5 - RedHat 7 machines having uptime about 2 years)
2. All major Linux distributions either have switched to systemd or plan to do so in next release... I prefer system V init. I don't like something big handling everything when there is no reason to.
And the list can go on...
But there are changes I really like (to keep the balance...). Such as switching to XFS as to default fs! And BTW, I was extremely happy I went with RedHat/CentOS when my debian friend sysadmin was re-creating all keys and certificates (and rebuilding systems) after known random number generator flop debian had...
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
Thanks. Valeri
On Wed, July 30, 2014 2:13 pm, Always Learning wrote:
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:07 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
..... And even though I'm using CentOS on all workstations in the
Department and on several older servers (introduction and philosophy of RHEL 7 made it clear that new servers will definitely be not CentOS 7, -
FreeBSD most likely), ....
May I ask why your servers are leaving the Red Hat environment?
Thank you.
-- Regards,
Paul. England, EU.
Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office. Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 23:13 +0300, Eero Volotinen wrote:
Valeri Galtsev:
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
Thank you for your explanation. Everyone is ignorant, usually partially, because of lack of time, lack of brain power and lack of "in head" storage. I'm still learning.
Well, just like other in systems, ignore all security patches?
Surely the only re-boots needed are kernel related? Therefore the uptime is solely dependent on kernel improvements, including security patches, and hardware related problems. My current longest uptime is on C 6.5 = 185 days.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu wrote:
Oh, boy. Now I have to rant on Linux and RedHat after being so happy with them for much longer than a decade. OK, the first thing I have to admit: I'm ignorant person. Please teach something...
Now questions:
- How often do you reboot your Linux servers? (every about 45 days there
is either kernel or glibc update. I remember somewhere about RedHat 5 - RedHat 7 machines having uptime about 2 years)
- All major Linux distributions either have switched to systemd or plan
to do so in next release... I prefer system V init. I don't like something big handling everything when there is no reason to.
And the list can go on...
But there are changes I really like (to keep the balance...). Such as switching to XFS as to default fs! And BTW, I was extremely happy I went with RedHat/CentOS when my debian friend sysadmin was re-creating all keys and certificates (and rebuilding systems) after known random number generator flop debian had...
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
You don't _have_ to install a new kernel/glibc the second it is released, especially if the server isn't internet-exposed. Usually any memory leak or device driver bugs are discovered and fixed quickly in the release cycle, so if current kernel has any of those problems they should be fixed soon. Then you just need to watch the update notifications and decide if subsequent updates are something you need badly enough to reboot. Just be aware that something that is described as a 'local root escalation' might be combined with different application-level bugs in server programs to give the effect of remote exploits (and there _will_ be people who know how to do that) so you can't ignore everything.
2014-07-30 23:03 GMT+03:00 Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu:
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
Oh, Valera, it seems you don't know about this:
http://www.kernelcare.com/try_it/install.php http://www.cloudlinux.com/blog/clnews/kernelcare-for-centos-rhel-7.php
On Wed, July 30, 2014 3:16 pm, Maxim Shpakov wrote:
2014-07-30 23:03 GMT+03:00 Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu:
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
Oh, Valera, it seems you don't know about this:
http://www.kernelcare.com/try_it/install.php http://www.cloudlinux.com/blog/clnews/kernelcare-for-centos-rhel-7.php _______________________________________________
Hi Maxim,
Thanks for pointers!
I knew about similar thing: ksplice
for about 7 years or so. I was offered that at discounted price (one of brilliant programmers at that company is relative of our Center Director). I decided against that. It is similar thing to why I do not use RedHat (even though our university maintains license), but use CentOS instead. More direct solution (i.e. switching servers to system which I do not have to schedule reboot often; FreeBSD would be one of the choices) was the decision for servers. But workstations stay CentOS (CentOS 7 from now on). The system is great for the purpose!
Thanks to everybody for all your input: it is really instructive!
Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WTF does this email have to do with the subject????
On 07/30/2014 03:03 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Oh, boy. Now I have to rant on Linux and RedHat after being so happy with them for much longer than a decade. OK, the first thing I have to admit: I'm ignorant person. Please teach something...
Now questions:
- How often do you reboot your Linux servers? (every about 45 days there
is either kernel or glibc update. I remember somewhere about RedHat 5 - RedHat 7 machines having uptime about 2 years)
- All major Linux distributions either have switched to systemd or plan
to do so in next release... I prefer system V init. I don't like something big handling everything when there is no reason to.
And the list can go on...
But there are changes I really like (to keep the balance...). Such as switching to XFS as to default fs! And BTW, I was extremely happy I went with RedHat/CentOS when my debian friend sysadmin was re-creating all keys and certificates (and rebuilding systems) after known random number generator flop debian had...
So, please, teach me something: how do I build enterprise level server based CentOS 7 which I'll be able to run 1-2 years without reboot (I did apologize already for being ignorant person ;-)
Thanks. Valeri
On Wed, July 30, 2014 2:13 pm, Always Learning wrote:
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:07 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
..... And even though I'm using CentOS on all workstations in the
Department and on several older servers (introduction and philosophy of RHEL 7 made it clear that new servers will definitely be not CentOS 7,
FreeBSD most likely), ....
May I ask why your servers are leaving the Red Hat environment?
Thank you.
-- Regards,
Paul. England, EU.
Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office. Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 03:03:29PM -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
- How often do you reboot your Linux servers? (every about 45 days there
is either kernel or glibc update. I remember somewhere about RedHat 5 - RedHat 7 machines having uptime about 2 years)
Eventually, you'll be able to use kpatch to avoid reboots for kernel updates, (http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2014/02/26/kpatch/), however I tend to think that Uptime is overrated. Newer technologies, such as VMs and containers, allow services to not be tied to single servers anymore. Anyway, it's hardly Red Hat's fault that it addresses security issues promptly.
On 2014-07-30, Jonathan Billings billings@negate.org wrote:
Eventually, you'll be able to use kpatch to avoid reboots for kernel updates, (http://rhelblog.redhat.com/2014/02/26/kpatch/),
This looks very exciting!
however I tend to think that Uptime is overrated.
uptime as a number of days is overrated, but scheduling down time is certainly not.
Newer technologies, such as VMs and containers, allow services to not be tied to single servers anymore.
The container host still needs to be patched and rebooted. For simple services with light storage needs this is fine, but a container with large local storage might not be easy to hot migrate. You're certainly not going to migrate a 30TB storage container, for example.
Anyway, it's hardly Red Hat's fault that it addresses security issues promptly.
No, but the kernel itself has had a number of serious flaws this calendar year, which is what the previous poster was concerned about.
--keith
-
Adrian Buciuman -
Always Learning -
Eero Volotinen -
Jim Perrin -
Johnny Hughes -
Jonathan Billings -
Keith Keller -
Les Mikesell -
Maxim Shpakov -
Valeri Galtsev