On Mar 20, 2011, at 1:52 PM, William Warren wrote: > On 3/20/2011 3:30 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> On 3/20/11 1:57 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote: >>> . >>>> I hope the situation may change now with Oracle in direct >>>> competition with >>>> RH >>>> for RH and RH-based distros user base. BTW Oracle offers >>>> installable >>>> binaries for free. >>> Yes, but patches (support) cost money, as you might know. Anyway, it >>> is better to pay for real >>> RH instead of oracle linux.. >> Or, maybe there was back in the days when they released source that >> matched >> their binaries... Personally, I think everyone would be better off >> today if >> they had turned their back on anything RH-related the day they >> stopped >> permitting redistribution of their binaries among the community >> that created >> them and made them usable in the first place. I was too lazy to >> change and >> Centos made it look reasonable to leave things approximately the >> same. But, now >> that RH is putting the screws on anyone who doesn't pay up it is >> probably time >> for anyone who cares about free software to rethink things. >> > exactly. Nothing against Centos but I've deployed my last RH based > box. It'll be either Debian or Ubuntu from now on. I don't get it, why so radical? Why not go SL and maintain the same methodology? - aurf