Redhat ES/AS differences and licence - Questions

This is a discussion on Redhat ES/AS differences and licence - Questions ; Ok, done some searching and really havnt been able to find the answer i want. Not asking for much, just a definitive explanation Background: Have several Redhat AS "licences", purchased about a year ago. Then this summer, we've been acquiring ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Redhat ES/AS differences and licence

  1. Redhat ES/AS differences and licence

    Ok, done some searching and really havnt been able to find the answer i
    want. Not asking for much, just a definitive explanation

    Background: Have several Redhat AS "licences", purchased about a year
    ago. Then this summer, we've been acquiring ES licences for new boxes.
    We need to start renewing AS licences, but i dont really see the point and
    i have suggested getting ES instead as we dont have any boxes with >2 way
    cpu or >8GB RAM. I understand that the AS and ES products are really only
    support products, but the powers that be think that there is actual
    differences to the code and would require re-installing.

    So what given the vast cost difference between AS and ES licences, i would
    like to know:

    - Is there any actual difference between the kernal/packages provided in
    each product? Does AS have additional kernal code or other packages that
    allow >2 CPUs/>8RAM?

    - Given that Redhat is GPL (and i understand they are quite strict about
    comforming to it too) would any such kernal modifcation not be GPL too?

    - What really restricts one from installing multiple copies of AS or ES on
    boxes, assuming you dont want to have the cover provided by the support
    contract. Is there any proprietary/non-gpl software built in to the
    distributions?

    - At the end of the day, is Redhat simply offering user support levels on
    the basis of hardware configuration, rather than offering different
    distributions?

    Many thanks to anyone that can help.
    ---

  2. Re: Redhat ES/AS differences and licence

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 11:36:31 +0000, OCT wrote:

    > Ok, done some searching and really havnt been able to find the answer i
    > want. Not asking for much, just a definitive explanation
    >
    > Background: Have several Redhat AS "licences", purchased about a year
    > ago. Then this summer, we've been acquiring ES licences for new boxes. We
    > need to start renewing AS licences, but i dont really see the point and i
    > have suggested getting ES instead as we dont have any boxes with >2 way
    > cpu or >8GB RAM. I understand that the AS and ES products are really only
    > support products, but the powers that be think that there is actual
    > differences to the code and would require re-installing.
    >
    > So what given the vast cost difference between AS and ES licences, i would
    > like to know:
    >
    > - Is there any actual difference between the kernal/packages provided in
    > each product? Does AS have additional kernal code or other packages that
    > allow >2 CPUs/>8RAM?



    is empty, so I can't compare. Presumably, though, you have the src.rpms,
    so why not install them and compare for yourself?


    > - Given that Redhat is GPL (and i understand they are quite strict about
    > comforming to it too) would any such kernal modifcation not be GPL too?


    Correct. They'll be in the src.rpms.

    > - What really restricts one from installing multiple copies of AS or ES on
    > boxes, assuming you dont want to have the cover provided by the support
    > contract. Is there any proprietary/non-gpl software built in to the
    > distributions?


    As far as I can see, one cannot redistribute the *binaries* that RH
    provide, though you are entitled to rebuild a new set of binaries from
    their src.rpms and distribute those freely. The only exceptions, AFAIK,
    are those packages which include images of Red Hat trademarks.

    However, what RH say in their license is that if you want support and
    RHNet on /any/ of your RHEL hosts, *all* your RHEL hosts must have a valid
    RHNet contract/license.

    > - At the end of the day, is Redhat simply offering user support levels on
    > the basis of hardware configuration, rather than offering different
    > distributions?


    I think so.

    > Many thanks to anyone that can help.


    HTH,
    Alex.
    --
    Alex Butcher Brainbench MVP for Internet Security: www.brainbench.com
    Bristol, UK Need reliable and secure network systems?
    PGP/GnuPG ID:0x271fd950


+ Reply to Thread