[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: SlakWare or RedHat?



"Harvey J. Stein" <abel@netvision.net.il> wrote:
|Amos Shapira writes:
| > "Vadik V. Vygonets" <vadik@arbornet.org> wrote:
| > |On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Ira Abramov wrote:
|
|<snip>
|
| > |
| > |> - most of RedHat's installation IS GPLed, the tools are freely available
| > |> and reusable, and you can have it for free, the official version costs
| > |> more but also contains valueable commercial products(!).
| > |
| > |Can you get the sources of the packages you get?  (not the .tar.gz of the
| > |program, but the source of .rpm).  Well, you can get a source of .deb
| > |files in "[un]stable/sources".  BTW, stable and unstalbe are symbolic
| > |links to another directory, for example, "stable" now is a link to "rex",
| > |it seems.
| > 
| > See above for corrections.  Dunno if you can get sources to RPM's but
| > then, why should you?
|
|AFAIK, all RPMs have corresponding source RPMs.  For example, in the

Just to be clarify about this - RedHat are not the "big bad guy in
Redmont", they seem to share their work with anyone who'll talk to
them, they give away all their system and encourage people to create
their own RPM's.  In fact I've just noticed a couple of announcements
on comp.sys.linux.announce which included "RPM available" in their
subject line.

The bottom line of this, IMHO, is that "no sources" and "it's
commercial" are not good excuses for dropping RedHat.

Cheers,

--Amos

--Amos Shapira                    | "Of course Australia was marked for
133 Shlomo Ben-Yosef st.          |  glory, for its people had been chosen
Jerusalem 93 805                  |  by the finest judges in England."
ISRAEL             amos@dsi.co.il |                     -- Anonymous


References: