Xen and Mdadm?
-
@scottalanmiller So then why would someone want a free copy of RHEL vs. CentOS? Anything baked into RHEL that CentOS doesn't provide?
I understand there are very minor differences, but is there a justified reason? Documentation? Why does CentOS exist if RHEL can be given away for free, without paid support? Guessing you can't get updates if RHEL isn't licensed, whereas CentOS can, because they are protected by the GPL and serviced by the community...?
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller So then why would someone want a free copy of RHEL vs. CentOS? Anything baked into RHEL that CentOS doesn't provide?
No reason, which is why no one bothers with it. Or... that's exactly what CentOS is. Works both ways. CentOS is literally people took RHEL and gave it away for free. They are literally the same product. They are built from the same source. There is no reason whatsoever to want RHEL except that is where RH provides support. And I think you can buy support for CentOS these days.
So either....
- No one cares about a free RHEL because CentOS is identical to RHEL OR....
- People do care and made CentOS and you see free RHEL every day,.
-
@BBigford said:
I understand there are very minor differences, but is there a justified reason? Documentation? Why does CentOS exist if RHEL can be given away for free, without paid support?
Because you can't call it RHEL. The product is free, the name is not!!
-
@BBigford said:
Guessing you can't get updates if RHEL isn't licensed, whereas CentOS can, because they are protected by the GPL and serviced by the community...?
RHEL can be updated the same as CentOS, even without a license. But RH's own patch servers are only accessible to licensed users.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
I understand there are very minor differences, but is there a justified reason? Documentation? Why does CentOS exist if RHEL can be given away for free, without paid support?
Because you can't call it RHEL. The product is free, the name is not!!
wow, there's a lot of value in a name - but really is just FUD.
lolThe support though I suppose has value.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
I understand there are very minor differences, but is there a justified reason? Documentation? Why does CentOS exist if RHEL can be given away for free, without paid support?
Because you can't call it RHEL. The product is free, the name is not!!
wow, there's a lot of value in a name - but really is just FUD.
lolThe support though I suppose has value.
I wouldn't call it FUD. RH goes to rather extrordinary lengths to ensure that they are very clear that everything is free, CentOS is official and an exact copy of RHEL and that Fedora is free, too. From day one they've made such a huge deal about the GPL and everything that they do being free.
-
I never deal in any of that stuff, so ill have to take your word for it.
I have to assume my associates who do are fully aware and are choosing to pay for the support.
-
@Dashrender said:
I have to assume my associates who do are fully aware and are choosing to pay for the support.
Well lots of people intentionally pay for support because.... they want support. Nothing wrong with that. Red Hat support is excellent (they tried to hire me!)
They'd have to be pretty out of touch with Linux to be Linux Admins and unaware that CentOS is RHEL and free. I mean the first time you ask "what Linux should I learn" you learn that much.
-
I just wanted to comment that Oracle is selling support for RHEL, without the name, under their product Oracle Linux.
-
@coliver said:
I just wanted to comment that Oracle is selling support for RHEL, without the name, under their product Oracle Linux.
Good example.
