On 1/5/07, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 07:56 -0200, TEOTONIO wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > this is my first post. :-) > > > > Enterprise Linux Oracle is Centos or is based on Centos??? > > > > Sory my bad english :( > > > > I am a author of distro Libertas based on Fedora Core 3.0, instaled in > > plus 9000 PCs on scholl LAN (Belo Horizonte-MG Brazil). > > > > Well ... > > CentOS is based on the source files released here: > > http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/ > > Oracle Unbreakable Linux is based on the same source files. > > Oracle did also take some of the work that we have done (our changes to > above linked source files) and incorporated it into their product. > CentOS is GPL, so there is nothing wrong with that ... though they > should have that in their press and they don't. > > Still I would objectively say, that for the most part their product is > based on the RHEL sources (as CentOS only changes maybe 2% of the files > for artwork/trademark reasons) ... but they have certainly also based > their changes {on the files that need changing} on our work as well. > > Now ... if they would stop giving away free ISOs with security issues > and not allowing those to be updated for free, their potential customers > could actually deploy their product for testing and not fear that their > servers would be owned. > > Oracle REALLY, REALLY, REALLY needs to rethink this policy ... giving > away free ISOs that contain packages with known security vulnerabilities > and not providing free security updates is wrong headed and ABSOLUTELY > IRRESPONSIBLE. > > I can't understand how they can sleep at night. It's the same policy as RedHat and its RHN thingie. Both ORacle and Redhat provide fee-based updates. Fedora and Centos are the ways to go if you want to be totally free. cheers,