Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [TTLUG] Red Hat End of Life

Expand Messages
  • Richard Jobity
    ... THis is to do with RH no longer producing a desktop Red Hat. To quote NewsForge:
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Dave Smith wrote:
      > There's a whole lot of messages appearing on the Evolution mailing list
      > about RH9 EOL. Any one know what this is all about?
      >
      > Dave
      >
      THis is to do with RH no longer producing a desktop Red Hat.

      To quote NewsForge:

      http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/11/03/1657205.shtml?tid=150&tid=2&tid=82&tid=94

      The Bottom Line:

      If you want to use an enterprise-level Linux distribution with the Red
      Hat name on it, you are going to spend significant money. If you want to
      keep using a Red Hat-style distribution for free, you'll use Fedora. And
      if neither of these options appeal to you, there are plenty of other
      Linux distributions out there for you to choose from.


      Most people will use Fedora, or Tummy's KRUD, or something similar.




      --
      Richard Jobity, Tunapuna, Trinidad and Tobago | ph: (868) 620-5550
      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      http://www.ttlug.org | http://www.weakblog.com | http://www.jobity.com
      mail @ richjob@... | icq: 5183191 | aim: richjob | ym: richjob
      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Available to talk about Linux/open source. Mail me: richjob@...
    • Ansar Mohammed
      Richard,. How similar is the Fedora project to other Red Hat Linux versions? Also, what does this mean for me? 1. Can I still get iso s of Red Hat Linux? 2.
      Message 2 of 9 , Nov 4, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Richard,.

        How similar is the Fedora project to other Red Hat Linux versions?



        Also, what does this mean for me?



        1. Can I still get iso's of Red Hat Linux?
        2. will the FSF sue on behalf of the open source community.. Can they
        intervene legally?
        3. If Linux is GPL, how could this have happened in the first place?













        _____

        From: Richard Jobity [mailto:richjob@...]
        Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 4:19 AM
        To: TTLUG@yahoogroups.com



        Dave Smith wrote:
        > There's a whole lot of messages appearing on the Evolution mailing list
        > about RH9 EOL. Any one know what this is all about?
        >
        > Dave
        >
        THis is to do with RH no longer producing a desktop Red Hat.

        To quote NewsForge:

        http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/11/03/1657205.shtml?tid=150
        <http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/11/03/1657205.shtml?tid=150&tid=2&tid=
        82&tid=94> &tid=2&tid=82&tid=94

        The Bottom Line:

        If you want to use an enterprise-level Linux distribution with the Red
        Hat name on it, you are going to spend significant money. If you want to
        keep using a Red Hat-style distribution for free, you'll use Fedora. And
        if neither of these options appeal to you, there are plenty of other
        Linux distributions out there for you to choose from.


        Most people will use Fedora, or Tummy's KRUD, or something similar.




        --
        Richard Jobity, Tunapuna, Trinidad and Tobago | ph: (868) 620-5550
        -----------------------------------------------------------------
        http://www.ttlug.org | http://www.weakblog.com | http://www.jobity.com
        mail @ richjob@... | icq: 5183191 | aim: richjob | ym: richjob
        -----------------------------------------------------------------
        Available to talk about Linux/open source. Mail me: richjob@...







        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



        ADVERTISEMENT

        <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050065
        80:HM/A=1754452/R=0/SIG=11tn6fnpm/*http:/www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=601783
        24&partid=4116730> click here



        <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=267637.4116730.5333196.1261774/D=egroupmai
        l/S=:HM/A=1754452/rand=120028670>


        Help build TTLUG by forwarding this to anyone who is interested in the
        subject matter or would otherwise benefit from joining the mailing list.

        Trinidad and Tobago Linux Users Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ttlug
        To subscribe, send an email to_______ TTLUG-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        To unsubscribe, send an email to_____ TTLUG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        List owner/moderator Richard Jobity__ TTLUG-owner@yahoogroups.com


        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
        <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Richard Jobity
        ... The Fedora Project is the next evolution of Red Hat (the cheapie editions). Developments in Fedora will be rolled into Red Hat Enterprise Edition as
        Message 3 of 9 , Nov 4, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Ansar Mohammed wrote:

          > Richard,.
          >
          > How similar is the Fedora project to other Red Hat Linux versions?
          >

          The Fedora Project is the next evolution of Red Hat (the cheapie
          editions). Developments in Fedora will be rolled into Red Hat
          Enterprise Edition as needed. The Fedora Project IS what would have
          been Red Hat Linux 9.1 or Red Hat Linux 10. The same developers are
          working on it, it is just that the impetus is from the Red Hat user
          community, and not from Red Hat specifically.


          If you crave the Red Hat name, you can buy a subscription from Tummy
          (tweaked Red Hat with updates and hardening) for recent versions. Tummy
          may be one among many versions of Red Hat derived distros that you can
          do that with.

          >
          > Also, what does this mean for me?
          >
          >
          >
          > 1. Can I still get iso's of Red Hat Linux?

          Not of the $59 version. Where you would have been going to get Red Hat
          ISOs, you will now be getting Fedora ISOs.


          > 2. will the FSF sue on behalf of the open source community.. Can they
          > intervene legally?

          Will the FSF sue who? The FSF may sue on behalf of everybody who has
          assigned their license to the Free Software Foundation, and only after
          extensive dialouge.

          Is this in reference to the SCO case? The Linux kernel is copyright of
          its individual contributors, which include Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, and
          companies such as SGI and IBM. IBM is countersuing SCO for patent
          violation and copyright violation, since they are violating IBM's Linux
          kernel copyrights by attempting to distribute Linux under a license more
          restrictive than the GPL.

          The FSF may be able to file an amicus brief.

          Now that IBM and others are eager to start court arguments, SCO are
          delaying.

          Meanwhile. court action proceeds.



          > 3. If Linux is GPL, how could this have happened in the first place?


          The way of the FSF is not to make examples of companies that are
          suspected of violating the GPL. They try to get disputes worked out
          without going to court. To date, no company has tried to directly test
          the GPL in court. Like I said, the Linux kernel is not copyright the
          Free Software Foundation. Nor is Samba.

          Another possible response to your question is because certain companies
          with interest in destroying the GPL decided to help SCO. IBM subpoenaed
          those companies too.





          --
          Richard Jobity, Tunapuna, Trinidad and Tobago | ph: (868) 620-5550
          -----------------------------------------------------------------
          http://www.ttlug.org | http://www.weakblog.com | http://www.jobity.com
          mail @ richjob@... | icq: 5183191 | aim: richjob | ym: richjob
          -----------------------------------------------------------------
          Available to talk about Linux/open source. Mail me: richjob@...
        • Dave Smith
          So I wonder why I just got RH9? It s the sort of trick that I would expect from Microsoft ... ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 4, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            So I wonder why I just got RH9? It's the sort of trick that I would
            expect from Microsoft ...

            On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 04:19, Richard Jobity wrote:

            > Dave Smith wrote:
            > > There's a whole lot of messages appearing on the Evolution mailing list
            > > about RH9 EOL. Any one know what this is all about?
            > >
            > > Dave
            > >
            > THis is to do with RH no longer producing a desktop Red Hat.
            >
            > To quote NewsForge:
            >
            > http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/11/03/1657205.shtml?tid=150&tid=2&tid=82&tid=94
            >
            > The Bottom Line:
            >
            > If you want to use an enterprise-level Linux distribution with the Red
            > Hat name on it, you are going to spend significant money. If you want to
            > keep using a Red Hat-style distribution for free, you'll use Fedora. And
            > if neither of these options appeal to you, there are plenty of other
            > Linux distributions out there for you to choose from.
            >
            >
            > Most people will use Fedora, or Tummy's KRUD, or something similar.
            >
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Dave Smith
            Hmmm ... from a practical point of view ... if I have RH9 installed, will I have to re-install Fedora or can I just update from Fedora instead of RH? ...
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 4, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Hmmm ... from a practical point of view ... if I have RH9 installed,
              will I have to re-install Fedora or can I just update from Fedora
              instead of RH?

              On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 04:19, Richard Jobity wrote:

              > Dave Smith wrote:
              > > There's a whole lot of messages appearing on the Evolution mailing list
              > > about RH9 EOL. Any one know what this is all about?
              > >
              > > Dave
              > >
              > THis is to do with RH no longer producing a desktop Red Hat.
              >
              > To quote NewsForge:
              >
              > http://www.newsforge.com/software/03/11/03/1657205.shtml?tid=150&tid=2&tid=82&tid=94
              >
              > The Bottom Line:
              >
              > If you want to use an enterprise-level Linux distribution with the Red
              > Hat name on it, you are going to spend significant money. If you want to
              > keep using a Red Hat-style distribution for free, you'll use Fedora. And
              > if neither of these options appeal to you, there are plenty of other
              > Linux distributions out there for you to choose from.
              >
              >
              > Most people will use Fedora, or Tummy's KRUD, or something similar.
              >
              >
              >


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Richard Jobity
              ... Should be able to update from Fedora. Same apps, unchanged data formats. -- Richard Jobity, Tunapuna, Trinidad and Tobago | ph: (868) 620-5550 ...
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 5, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Dave Smith wrote:

                > Hmmm ... from a practical point of view ... if I have RH9 installed,
                > will I have to re-install Fedora or can I just update from Fedora
                > instead of RH?

                Should be able to update from Fedora. Same apps, unchanged data formats.

                --
                Richard Jobity, Tunapuna, Trinidad and Tobago | ph: (868) 620-5550
                -----------------------------------------------------------------
                http://www.ttlug.org | http://www.weakblog.com | http://www.jobity.com
                mail @ richjob@... | icq: 5183191 | aim: richjob | ym: richjob
                -----------------------------------------------------------------
                Available to talk about Linux/open source. Mail me: richjob@...
              • Ansar Mohammed
                Actually I was speaking about this situation(not that I am opposed to anyone protecting their property):
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 5, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  Actually I was speaking about this situation(not that I am opposed to anyone
                  protecting their property):

                  http://www.forbes.com/2003/10/14/cz_dl_1014linksys.html



                  NEW YORK - In the world of "free" open source software, there is no greater
                  villain than SCO, owner of the Unix operating system.

                  The Lindon, Utah, company has outraged Linux lovers by suing IBM (nyse: IBM
                  - news - people ), claiming IBM stole Unix code and put it into Linux. Some
                  fear the lawsuit by SCO (nasdaq: SCOX - news - people ) will impede the
                  adoption of Linux.


                  Linux's Hit Men

                  But the spread of Linux could be hurt by another group--and ironically, it's
                  the free-software proponents themselves.

                  For months, in secret, the Free Software Foundation, a Boston-based group
                  that controls the licensing process for Linux and other "free" programs, has
                  been making threats to Cisco Systems (nasdaq: CSCO - news - people ) and
                  Broadcom (nasdaq: BRCM - news - people ) over a networking router that runs
                  the Linux operating system.

                  The router is made by Linksys, a company Cisco acquired in June. It lets you
                  hook computers together on a wireless Wi-Fi network, employing a high-speed
                  standard called 802.11g. Aimed at home users, the $129 device has been a
                  smash hit, selling 400,000 units in the first quarter of this year alone.

                  But now there's a problem. The Linux software in the router is distributed
                  under the GNU General Public License (GPL), which the Free Software
                  Foundation created in 1991.

                  Under the license, if you distribute GPL software in a product, you must
                  also distribute the software's source code. And not just the GPL code, but
                  also the code for any "derivative works" you've created--even if publishing
                  that code means anyone can now make a knockoff of your product.

                  Not great news if you're Cisco, which paid $500 million for Linksys. In
                  Cisco's case, it's even trickier, because the disputed code resides on chips
                  that Linksys buys from Broadcom. So now Cisco is caught between the Free
                  Software Foundation and one of its big suppliers.

                  For several months, officials from the Free Software Foundation have been
                  quietly pushing Cisco and Broadcom for a resolution. According to Free
                  Software Foundation Executive Director Bradley Kuhn, the foundation is
                  demanding that Cisco and Broadcom either a) rip out all the Linux code in
                  the router and use some other operating system, or b) make their code
                  available to the entire world.

                  And if they balk? Kuhn raises the threat of legal action. "We defend the
                  rights protected by the GPL license," he says. "We have legal teeth, so if
                  someone does not share and share alike, we can make them obey the rules."

                  The legal teeth belong to Eben Moglen, a Columbia Law School professor who
                  acts as pro bono counsel for the foundation. Moglen says his chats with
                  Cisco have been friendly, and he believes the matter will be settled without
                  a court fight. Cisco and Broadcom wouldn't comment.

                  The dispute, which was leaked to an Internet message board, offers a rare
                  peek into the dark side of the free software movement--a view that contrasts
                  with the movement's usual public image of happy software proles linking arms
                  and singing the "Internationale" while freely sharing the fruits of their
                  code-writing labor.

                  In fact, the Free Software Foundation runs a lot of these "enforcement
                  actions." There are 30 to 40 going on right now, and there were 50 last
                  year, Kuhn says. There have been hundreds since 1991, when the current
                  version of the GPL was published, he says. Tracking down bad guys has become
                  such a big operation that the Free Software Foundation has created a
                  so-called Compliance Lab to snoop out violators and bust them.

                  Who pays for this? The 12-employee Free Software Foundation has limited
                  resources. So it seeks donations. And sometimes it collects money from
                  companies it has busted.

                  Last year, the foundation alleged that OpenTV, a San Francisco company that
                  ships a set-top box containing Linux, was violating the GPL. The drama took
                  months to resolve and ended with OpenTV writing a check for $65,000 to the
                  Free Software Foundation. "They paid us a very substantial payment for our
                  time and trouble," Moglen says.

                  Sometimes it's the other way around--the foundation gets paid by private
                  companies for whom it acts as a sort of hired enforcer. Last year a Swedish
                  software company called mySQL asked for help resolving a dispute with
                  NuSphere, a subsidiary of Progress Software (nasdaq: PRGS - news - people ).
                  The companies had made a deal to work on software that would include mySQL's
                  GPL-licensed database program. A dispute arose over contract issues, and
                  also over the GPL, which mySQL claimed NuSphere had violated. In the end,
                  Progress resolved the matter by walking away from the partnership.

                  Afterward, mySQL made a $25,000 donation to the Free Software Foundation.
                  Was this payback? "I won't say that," says Marten Mickos, chief executive of
                  mySQL. "But of course, why would we give them money if not as a sign of
                  gratitude?"

                  The mySQL versus NuSphere squabble demonstrates another risk: These disputes
                  might scare companies away from using open source software. Joseph Alsop,
                  chief executive of Progress, reckons the fiasco with mySQL cost his company
                  $10 million in lost development and marketing work. Now he says he is
                  cautious about working with GPL software. Instead, Progress uses an open
                  source database program distributed under the less onerous Berkeley Software
                  Distribution license.

                  In some ways, these Free Software Foundation "enforcement actions" can be
                  more dangerous than a typical copyright spat, because usually copyright
                  holders seek money--say, royalties on the product that infringing companies
                  are selling. But the Free Software Foundation doesn't want royalties--it
                  wants you to burn down your house, or at the very least share it with
                  cloners.

                  Or maybe, as some suggest, the foundation wants GPL-covered code to creep
                  into commercial products so it can use GPL to force open those products.
                  Kuhn says that's nuts--"pure propaganda rhetoric." But he concedes that his
                  foundation hates the way companies like Oracle (nasdaq: ORCL - news - people
                  ) and Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) generate billions of dollars
                  by selling software licenses. "We'd like people to stop selling proprietary
                  software. It's bad for the world," Kuhn says.

                  So far, none of the Free Software Foundation's targets have decided it is
                  bad for the world and gone to court. This despite the fact that the
                  foundation has $750,000 in the bank and one lawyer who works for free, part
                  time, when he's not teaching classes at Columbia University.

                  Will Cisco and Broadcom be the first? Probably they'll decide, like everyone
                  else, that it's cheaper to settle than to fight.

                  Such a pity, comrade.




                  > 2.      will the FSF sue on behalf of the open source community.. Can they
                  > intervene legally?

                  Will the FSF sue who?  The FSF may sue on behalf of everybody who has
                  assigned their license to the Free Software Foundation, and only after
                  extensive dialouge.

                  Is this in reference to the SCO case?  The Linux kernel is copyright of
                  its individual contributors, which include Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox, and
                  companies such as SGI and IBM.  IBM is countersuing SCO for patent
                  violation and copyright violation, since they are violating IBM's Linux
                  kernel copyrights by attempting to distribute Linux under a license more
                  restrictive than the GPL.

                  The FSF may be able to file an amicus brief.

                  Now that IBM and others are eager to start court arguments, SCO are
                  delaying.

                  Meanwhile. court action proceeds.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.