Drop RedHat for Debian - Linux

This is a discussion on Drop RedHat for Debian - Linux ; Due to the proprietary structure of RedHat, we chose to drop its usage. We even used CentOS as an alternative, but the cost was not the main factor. The main factor was the non-standard use of File system hierarchy. We ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Drop RedHat for Debian

  1. Drop RedHat for Debian

    Due to the proprietary structure of RedHat, we chose to drop its usage. We
    even used CentOS as an alternative, but the cost was not the main factor.
    The main factor was the non-standard use of File system hierarchy. We
    prefer standardization even when it comes to a Linux distro and conform to
    the File System Hierarchy Group standards was a big factor.

    We have no regrets since the change as we also found Debian to have much
    more to offer in terms of applications, configurations, and ease of
    administration.

    Thanks Debian - please learn standards RedHat.

  2. Re: Drop RedHat for Debian

    Paul Miter wrote:

    > Due to the proprietary structure of RedHat, we chose to drop its usage.
    > We even used CentOS as an alternative, but the cost was not the main
    > factor.
    > The main factor was the non-standard use of File system hierarchy. We
    > prefer standardization even when it comes to a Linux distro and conform to
    > the File System Hierarchy Group standards was a big factor.
    >
    > We have no regrets since the change as we also found Debian to have much
    > more to offer in terms of applications, configurations, and ease of
    > administration.


    Who the hell is "we"???

    >
    > Thanks Debian - please learn standards RedHat.



  3. Re: Drop RedHat for Debian

    In alt.os.linux Paul Miter :
    > Due to the proprietary structure of RedHat, we chose to drop its usage. We
    > even used CentOS as an alternative, but the cost was not the main factor.


    We had lots of discussions about the matter and even if the
    license seems questionable, it exactly says:

    "As a licensee under the GPL and other applicable copyright
    licenses, you may replicate the software contained in Red Hat?
    Linux? or Red Hat? Enterprise Linux?, whether downloaded from an
    FTP site or other electronic download site or copied from a CD
    originally produced by Red Hat, and may market the replicated
    product in accordance with the terms of the copyright licenses.
    However, it would be confusing to consumers if you identify such
    a replicated product as Red Hat? Linux?."

    [http://www.redhat.com/about/corporat...es/page6.html]

    > The main factor was the non-standard use of File system hierarchy. We
    > prefer standardization even when it comes to a Linux distro and conform to
    > the File System Hierarchy Group standards was a big factor.


    Strange, try on some recent RH system:

    $ lsb_release -v
    LSB Version: 1.3

    Looks like it's compatible to lsb.

    > We have no regrets since the change as we also found Debian to have much
    > more to offer in terms of applications, configurations, and ease of
    > administration.


    > Thanks Debian - please learn standards RedHat.


    Great if it works for you, personally like Debian, it's pretty
    fast and apt is a great tool. Using 'yum' you can have more or
    less the same on RH and other rpm 4.x based distro. The problem
    with Debian and alike, if you want/need to run proprietary
    software, there are always only two distro supported by almost
    anything, Redhat/Suse enterprise, that's all.

    You can download some test suites concerning lsb-fhs directly
    from the opengroup (maintainer of the UNIX trademark):

    http://www.opengroup.org/testing/lsb-fhs/

    Haven't tried them out.

    --
    Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
    mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
    #bofh excuse 51: Cosmic ray particles crashed through the hard
    disk platter

+ Reply to Thread