[CentOS] CentOS and SL, together?

[Lamar Owen]

On Saturday 28 May 2005 19:38, Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:
> From: Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu>
> > Referencing SL3 and CentOS 3 (as I haven't run SL4 as yet) there were
> > some scientific applications and some Java stuff, eclipse for one,

> You do understand the redistribution issues with Java, correct?
> It's a Sun problem (a typical thorn for Red Hat in general), not a Red Hat
> one.

I was asked what the differences between CentOS and SL were.  I simply 
enumerated some of the differences.  The Fermi internal Linux had permission 
from Sun to redistribute JRE for a particular version, apparently, but the 
latest does not include a JRE.

As to Pine, the license does not preclude distribution; Red Hat just didn't 
like the way modifications couldn't be done, rendering it unsupportable.  A 
'SLplus' repo addition to CentOS (hosted by Fermi or whoever) would probably 
handle the things that are different (like pcp and the others), and that 
could handle things.

However, with the reaction this got I wonder if Connie and the rest would want 
to try working in that direction.  The OpenAFS kernel portion could be a 
problem, but could be handled again by a 'SLPlus' repository.

Overreaction is not a good thing, and the upthread post was an overreaction; 
you're not telling me anything I don't know, Bryan.  I was just enumerating 
the differences; nothing more.  I do not use SL at this point; but just 
pointing out the duplication of effort that is going on.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Director of Information Technology
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu