On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Guido Berhoerster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: >> >> No, CentOS only exists because RedHat was extremely restrictive about >> any usage of their trademark. The CentOS folks weren't even allowed to >> reference the fact that their packages came from RedHat Enterprise >> Linux. >> >> The other difference is that, thanks to ips, it is fairly easy to >> setup a repository. >> >> As such, should there be no "security fixes only" repository provided >> by Sun, community members can certainly provide one and users can >> simply add that to their configuration. > > That was all I meant. > >> Debian and Fedora both rely upon community members to supply most of >> their packages and maintenance. I don't see why our expectations >> should be any different for OpenSolaris. >> >> I think it would be unreasonable to expect Sun to provide *everything* > > I did not mean everything, but rather bi-annual releases of OpenSolaris and > the availability of security fixes. This is what I also get from Linux
As I said before, many GNU/Linux distributions depend upon community members to supply and maintain packages. Why does Sun have to provide it? > distributions and IMO nothing unreasonable to expect. I'm a student and > consider myself a Unix hobbyist, I don't need and want a support contract > but I like a certain amount of stability and do not like a system with > security vulnerabilities. But you are wanting a stable system with specific fixes only, that sounds like you want support. >> free (how would they stay in business?) > > By selling support contracts (to commercial customers) and hardware? Isn't maintaining software a form of support? RedHat requires you to subscribe to receive updates to RHEL, even after you've bought it. I don't see why Sun can't... -- Shawn Walker "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
