Gilboa Davara wrote: Sorry to snip so much....but one thing struck me....
You said: > Last and not least, the OP (at least the message I saw) was talking > about VMWare Server 2.x which had a known issue with PAM [1] and > SELinux (...) that didn't really seem to get VMWare's attention. > When I tried getting support (mind you, at the time we were thinking > about spending a lot of money on ESX - for me the VMWare Server 2.x > deployment was just testing purpose) - I got the ever-annoying-company > line - we only support RHEL and SLES.... > I wonder how you could find their response annoying.. They state very clearly in their documentation what 32-bit and 64-bit host Linux OS they support. They also state very clearly what 32-bit and 64-bit host Windows OS they support. They also state the requirements for guest OS as well as what levels of the various browsers are supported. So I don't understand. Are you saying that VMware has no right to impose some boundaries on what they will and will not support? Are they bound by some contract to provide answers/solutions to a free product for every flavor of Linux used as host OS? Or, are you saying that their only obligation is to support every version of Fedora for free? And if so, what make Fedora so special to get support? -- Feel disillusioned? I've got some great new illusions, right here! mei-mei.gres...@greshko.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
