RedHat Linux Enterprise GNU??

Hi, This is just a question that came to my mind.

First, Linux is supposed to have been released under the GPL licence
isnt it??, if this is true, then secondly, RedHat Linux (the enterprise
not FC) also has portions of Linux doesnt it?, and this yields my third
question if it has portions of linux isnt Red Hat forced to give it back
to the community GPL'ed as well?? .


--
std P.S. I gladly accept replies with constructive and intelligent
information, please abstent of writing flames or anything else as I
will only read them and laugh (i.e. I will not answer them.)

Omar Baqueiro wrote:
> Hi, This is just a question that came to my mind.
>
> First, Linux is supposed to have been released under the GPL licence
> isnt it??, if this is true, then secondly, RedHat Linux (the enterprise
> not FC) also has portions of Linux doesnt it?, and this yields my third
> question if it has portions of linux isnt Red Hat forced to give it back
> to the community GPL'ed as well?? .

Yes, and they do it. They release all the sources for RHEL. This is how
systems like CentOS are built. They compile the RHEL sources and give us
a system that it's compatible (almost the same) with RHEL.

So if you want a RHEL GPL look for CentOS. And there are also other
similar proyects, like Whitelinux and some others. But I like CentOS.

Regards.


--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC
jkerouac@bgsec.com
bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

(Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez <jkerouac@bgsec.com>) scribbled:

> So if you want a RHEL GPL look for CentOS. And there are also other
> similar proyects, like Whitelinux

.... er, "White Box" Linux

--
<< http://michaeljtobler.homelinux.com () >>
Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors
and miss - Lazarus Long, "Time Enough for Love"

Thanks a lot, so now my question is then what is the difference between
RHEL and Fedora?? why make this two versions? why mark this RHEL as a
commercial version?

I guess the only difference is the service they provide with RHEL and
you dont get with fedora, isnt it?
Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez wrote:
> Omar Baqueiro wrote:
>
>> Hi, This is just a question that came to my mind.
>>
>> First, Linux is supposed to have been released under the GPL licence
>> isnt it??, if this is true, then secondly, RedHat Linux (the
>> enterprise not FC) also has portions of Linux doesnt it?, and this
>> yields my third question if it has portions of linux isnt Red Hat
>> forced to give it back to the community GPL'ed as well?? .
>
>
> Yes, and they do it. They release all the sources for RHEL. This is how
> systems like CentOS are built. They compile the RHEL sources and give us
> a system that it's compatible (almost the same) with RHEL.
>
> So if you want a RHEL GPL look for CentOS. And there are also other
> similar proyects, like Whitelinux and some others. But I like CentOS.
>
> Regards.
>
>


--
std P.S. I gladly accept replies with constructive and intelligent
information, please abstent of writing flames or anything else as I
will only read them and laugh (i.e. I will not answer them.)

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez wrote (in part):

> The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
> mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
> the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
> like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
> -- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

I like the following:

The Reasonable man adapts himself to the world.

The Unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.

Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

-- George Bernard Shaw

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:20:00 up 46 days, 16:37, 3 users, load average: 4.14, 4.20, 4.16

(Omar Baqueiro <obaqueiro@gmail.com>) scribbled:

> Thanks a lot, so now my question is then what is the difference between
> RHEL and Fedora?? why make this two versions? why mark this RHEL as a
> commercial version?

.... try checking the a product vendor's website next time:

http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/


and please dont TOP POST


--
<< http://michaeljtobler.homelinux.com (Bow Wow Wow - Fever (Annabella)) >>

Omar Baqueiro wrote:
> Thanks a lot, so now my question is then what is the difference between
> RHEL and Fedora?? why make this two versions? why mark this RHEL as a
> commercial version?

You might wish to go to the Red Hat web site and find out from the horse's
mouth, as they say.

To oversimplify, RHEL 3 (and now, RHEL 4) are meant to be stable,
reliable, distributions that are fully supported, and guaranteed to be
supported for 5 years so that you will not be exposed to the continual
changes you make when you update other distributions from one release to
the next. You do have to make those changes when you go from RHEL 3 to
RHEL 4, but you can skip a bunch of those releases if you want and upgrade
only every 4 to 5 years if this suits your needs.

OTOH, my impression of Fedora Core 2 is that they try to be bleeding-edge,
updating frequently, and with stuff that does not always work very well.
For example, while CUPS could print to the locally attached printer, it
would not print from the other machine (running RHEL3) on the LAN, so I
had to downgrade to RHL9 to get CUPS to work. Also, the ISA Soundblaster
card (5 years old) could not be detected and would not work even though it
worked on RHL7.3 and RHL9.

This is well suited to the hobbyist who enjoys playing around more than he
needs to get actual work done, and who gets a feeling of satisfaction of
running the latest and greatest.
>
> I guess the only difference is the service they provide with RHEL and
> you dont get with fedora, isnt it?

No. See Red Hat's web site:

http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/details/
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhel/features/

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:45:00 up 46 days, 17:02, 3 users, load average: 4.20, 4.34, 4.26

mjt wrote:
> (Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez <jkerouac@bgsec.com>) scribbled:
>
>
>>So if you want a RHEL GPL look for CentOS. And there are also other
>>similar proyects, like Whitelinux
>
>
> .... er, "White Box" Linux

Sorry, I type more quickly than I can think :-)
Obviusly you are right, it's White Box Linux.

Regards.

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC
jkerouac@bgsec.com
bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez wrote (in part):
>
>> The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
>> mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
>> the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
>> like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
>> -- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"
>
>
> I like the following:
>
> The Reasonable man adapts himself to the world.
>
> The Unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
>
> Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
>
> -- George Bernard Shaw

A very good cite. I like it very much.

Regards.

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC
jkerouac@bgsec.com
bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAÑA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

Thanks a lot for the answers, first I just wanted a quick answer as I am
not installing FC or RHEL or anything, it was just vague curiosity,
second, no need TO SHOUT, should I need to find a to add my *Off Topic*
question?.

And third, the /simplified/ explaniation given by Jean (se other paret
replies) is everything I needed.

Again, thank you.

Cheers,

Omar.
mjt wrote:
> (Omar Baqueiro <obaqueiro@gmail.com>) scribbled:
>
>
>>Thanks a lot, so now my question is then what is the difference between
>>RHEL and Fedora?? why make this two versions? why mark this RHEL as a
>>commercial version?
>
>
> ... try checking the a product vendor's website next time:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/software/rhelorfedora/
>
>
> and please dont TOP POST
>
>


--
std P.S. I gladly accept replies with constructive and intelligent
information, please abstent of writing flames or anything else as I
will only read them and laugh (i.e. I will not answer them.)