Slashdot Mirror

Yes, should work just fine both ways

One issue that might affect some people is the exec-shield anti-stack overflow technology, which
most notably doesn't play will with wine and alsalib (latter might be fixed nowadays, alsalib used to use a gcc feature that made it place code on the stack).

You can easily disable it through /proc, or use a program called chstk to enable executable stacks for specific programs. It's not included in this beta, but you can grab it from
here

For all I know, it may go from 9 to 10, because of the big changes in project direction - see here. But, when the major number changes, it's due to a major change, that much is certain.

Granted, it's not the same as a paper manual but since you mentioned quality, they're really excellent.

Actually, RH's documentation is not "really excellent." Well, if by "excellent" you mean "well-written," then, fine, but there's little or nothing in RH's documentation that couldn't be learned by reading the HOW-TOs at the Linux Documentation Project, which is to say, RH's documentation is way too basic.

When I've hit rough patches - getting my HP inkjet to work before CUPS became standard, for example, or trying to figure out how GRUB worked, or why LILO wasn't working - RH's documentation hasn't helped at all. (And I'm still a Linux newbie.)

One thing I like a lot about RH (besides its easy installation routine) is the Red Hat Network, which is a great way to keep current. But probably the only reason I'd buy a boxed copy of RH is if a period of free telephone-based tech support came with it - and AFAIK it never did.

My god, Microsoft has already release TWO PATCHES this year for Windows 2003. This is HORRIBLE, oh my god Microsucks is just such a crappy company, they can't make software worth shit.

Redhat Linux on the other hand, we just know is 100% secure! Well, as long as you ignore all those patches Redhat released for Enterprise Linux this year that were not put on the front page of slashdot as part of a FUD campaign.

eCos has ITRON API implemented as a compatibility subsystem.

eCos has ITRON API implemented as a compatibility subsystem.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to give the users appropriate rights to the machine without sacrificing system security?

It's quite easy actually :)

http://redhat.com/

Maybe I'm missing something but isn't ext3 the most popular "desktop" file system?

native POSIX threads (needs to be enabled in the glibc with an adon package, and probably all packages recompiled against it..., but) look here if you fancy setting it up yourself. i've heard of unbelieveable speedups on threaded code using this library, which will not work on a 2.4.x kernel.

hey, i got a good site for you...

Here

and if i can find the good site...ill post it...

also try searching google and asking for help in iirc rooms...plus make sure you have a back-up kernel if compiling messes you up..

Worse, as you begin to try to standardize coding of your configure.in and Makefile.in files, it begins to dawn on you just how much more boilerplate could be automatically generated.

Ergo, automake.

However, by the time I started learning the syntax for automake and tried to figure out just exactly how libtool can magically make shared library construction and maintenance a cross-platform reality, I get tired of the whole damn business and think: there has got to be a better way.

I don't know that SCons is that better way, because the problem it has to solve is complicated.

Personally, I had high hopes that the software carpentry project would have chosen some of the XML features of Tan by David Ascher - specifically, having a way for the build to query the system for some information about the best place to find previously installed software.

Fancy autoconf m4 macros (clever, but ugly) can indeed check for existing installations of other packages and accepting user-specified overrides, but somehow it seems to me that having some databases (XML, but simple enough to edit by hand) to describe how you want the build to look for packages is better than specifying 8 options like --with-ssl-include-dir=/some/long/path, etc.

Finally, despite being a Python fan, I've always been skeptical about whether the SCons approach to replacing Bourne shell with the admittedly more powerful language was really a good idea, mainly because of the broader availability of sh.

But time has made less relevant those systems on which Python cannot be built, so perhaps my concerns are overstated.

Nevertheless, if you want to build Python, I notice that it uses autoconf:)

Maybe if Python had a module that could crank out Bourne shell like m4 does, but without the ugly m4 syntax?

What about eCos?

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot [freebsd.org] like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl ! Doesn't she [madchat.org] make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox . As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser . Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her !

With sexy chicks [spilth.org] like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her [kurtspace.com] in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she [kurtspace.com] is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these [drexel.edu]? Join the campaign for more cute [madchat.org] open source babes [madchat.org] today!

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Cobra::ORBit

It's not quite ready for prime-time yet, but this is getting closer to being able to code your macros in Perl.

the antitrust service pack

For those of you who haven't heard of this, yet, here are places you can get it:

Mirror 1a
Mirror 1b
Mirror 2
Mirror 3
Mirror 4

These mirrors also work well:

Mirror 5
Mirror 6

red hat's default behavior is to install urpmi.

How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!

You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!

With sexy chicks like the lovely Ceren you will have people queuing up to buy open source products. Look! This guy can't get in there fast enough with her in the doorway! Come on, you must admit she is better than an overweight penguin! Don't you wish you could get one of these? Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

So tempting to mod you down like the troll you are but why not bite instead.

If you just go to this little link right here you'll find a very easy to use Office app that you can install in a few clicks on Windows, Solaris or Linux. And not only does it not have to be compiled, it doesn't cost your money or freedom either!

Or perhaps you'd like the entire linux OS, free of licensing, without having to compile a single thing. Here are just a few examples.

I highly recommend Redhat (the Personal versions will work, go for Pro if you need support); its documentation for what you described is great. Redhat is very easy to install and is nicely tweaked to be a small-office server "out of the box". The documentation is very concise, and shows the easy way to do things ( configuring samba ), while giving you an understanding of whats going on. See the Reference guide for documentation on email and ldap.

I highly recommend Redhat (the Personal versions will work, go for Pro if you need support); its documentation for what you described is great. Redhat is very easy to install and is nicely tweaked to be a small-office server "out of the box". The documentation is very concise, and shows the easy way to do things ( configuring samba ), while giving you an understanding of whats going on. See the Reference guide for documentation on email and ldap.

I highly recommend Redhat (the Personal versions will work, go for Pro if you need support); its documentation for what you described is great. Redhat is very easy to install and is nicely tweaked to be a small-office server "out of the box". The documentation is very concise, and shows the easy way to do things ( configuring samba ), while giving you an understanding of whats going on. See the Reference guide for documentation on email and ldap.

No Java, no JSP man. Simply use PHP for web development.
Forget Java man and go to PHP!

PHP is 4 times faster than Java technology 'JSP' (Java server pages).
This tallies because compiled "C" program is 4 times faster than Java.

Moreover, PHP is getting the object oriented features of Java language.

The real usefulness of Java is 'Java applets' which run on client browsers but on the server side you simply use PHP.

PHP is a very lightening fast object oriented scripting language. PHP is 100% written in "C" and there is no virtual machine as in Java. Nothing can beat "C" language ("C" is a language which never dies!!)

(Java is just another language. The PHP project needs millions of Java programmers who can add the Java's language features like inner classes, static, private, protected and others to PHP. PHP already has some of java' features).
Java programmers will really "LOVE" PHP as PHP class is identical to Java's class keyword.

Read the benchmars of Java JSP and PHP. PHP tops in the speed!!

Read the doc here and mirrors at [1], [2], [3], [4].

So are you suggesting that people switch to RH Linux because of their long life cycle?

Linux is almost exclusively what I do besides Solaris, and I'm getting very, very frustrated with RHs release policy.

Just as Windows != Red Hat Linux, Windows Update != Red Hat Network.

Most people believe that the Red Hat Network simply is the "up2date" portion of the distribution. There are well-designed host based and online utilities to allow you to manage a network of machines built upon Red Hat Linux for ease of updating, installation, and configuring without having to leave your desk. You can read about the Red Hat Network, and how it can be extremely beneficial to systems administrators and companies at a whole for a relatively modest fee.

Windows Update covers the operating system and does not cover Microsoft's other products (such as productivity, development, office, etc. applications). Each product has its own method of updating (whether automated or manual). The price of Windows do not include all of Microsoft's products. If you were to purchase all of Microsoft's products (at retail), you would spend a metric butt-ton more than just $200.

The package management part of Red Hat Network covers the entire distribution, including all the packages not a part of the "core" operating system. These packages offer multiple applications, development suites, etc. that are not featured with Windows. Red Hat Network can control many different machines in your group. Windows Update is limited to the machine it is being accessed from by the user at the machine at a given time.

Keep in mind that keeping with Red Hat's subscription-based Red Hat Network service does not entitle you to services only for that particular version of distribution. You can upgrade to the latest-and-greatest distribution (via the Red Hat Network) and still obtain support for a theoretically infinite life-cycle (so long as Red Hat stays afloat, and your subscription is current).

RedHat's policy is that if you want 5 years of support, buy a copy of enterprise Linux, otherwise upgrade your O/S every year. Simple.

The nice part about Linux is you aren't locked into one vendor. If you don't like it, run Debian or SuSE or something else!

by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 26, @09:29PM (#6308662)
Updates to 2.0.x aren't done by Linus anymore, but they are still done! There are still 2.0.x boxes deployed out there, so if someone finds a bug in an ancient kernel, it's not too late to patch it.

I just checked RedHat, and the oldest supported release is 7.1 with the end of life December 31, 2003. And it is based on kernel 2.4. For earlier products (kernels 2.0 and 2.2), they don't even provide security fixes.

Their policy is to provide maintenance for at least 12 months. Microsoft gives you 7 years.

They are site licensing the server products, almost the entire product line. Sharepoint, SQL Server, etc etc etc ad nauseaum.

Indeed, I feel ill. What exactly does all that shit provide that free software does not? Vendor lock-in? Great.

The details aren't being disclosed because MS doesn't want their other customers getting pissed at the ball breaking that the Army gave them

Nuts. I've never heard of a non-clasified public purchase with a NDA. It's my half a billion dollars, I want the details. Only crooks who sell crap have to hide their details. You would think they would be happy to give anyone buying half a million computers a similar deal.

There's no excuse for buing into more Microshit right now. Computer hardware has been more than adequate for general purpose desktop computing for the last six years. If the software those computers came with is no longer up to the task, I suggest looking at alternate software. There are a few other good American companies that could use this kind of shot in the arm but would provide a much better product:

• Red Hat has far superior server and desktop software and support.
• Sun also has all three and a great Productivity suit for much less than M$ Office
• Debian software quality and updating sheme are hard to beat. Yes, Star Office runs just fine on their stable distro.

We can be sure that Dell, Gateway, etc would be happy to work with any of the above software firms for this contract.

The fact of the matter is that the US Army took a half a million computer order and got themseves treated like some dinky midsized company with a thousand desktops. Next thing you know, they will be on the three year upgrade cycle. They did it because they were told to do it that way or they were incompetent. Either way, it's un-fucking-forgivable. They have a whole, ummm, Army of technically qualified people!

I suppose one of the problems with benchmarking on Windows with GCC is that GCC does not run NATIVELY on Windows... you need to run it on top of Cygwin or MinGW.

That alone will make the performance hit that Wosniak was talking about. It's strange business benchmarking across two entirely different processors. I think they've done the best possible to balance the scales by using GCC on OSX and Linux (where it can run natively). Maybe they should have run the Dells on a similar to OSX's BSD build for x86 (maybe Darwin, though it's probably not optimized as much for x86) to get even closer to normalizing the benchmark (if it's really possible). Though, I think Linux on workstations is more realisting in the real world than BSD on x86 workstations so it's pretty fair.

In any case, if the 3Ghz G5 happens on the schedule stated by Steve Jobs, the Powermacs running dual 3Ghz G5's should be head and shoulders above the current Intel-based offerings. Of course, we'll have to wait and see what Intel and AMD have available by then.

You know, processor benchmarking is just a geek way of saying "mine is bigger than...". I think it's great that Apple's really back in the performance game, it can only help everyone by re-lighting a fire under Intel, IBM, and AMD to innovate in a contest for (temporary) bragging rights.

• $60 per computer per year -- Basic RedHat Network.
• $96 per computer per year -- Enterprise RedHat Network.

• $2,499 per computer per year -- Enterprise AS Operating System (Premium)
• $1,499 per computer per year --- Enterprise AS Operating System (Standard)
• $799 per computer per year -- Enterprise ES Operating System (Standard)
• $349 per computer per year -- Enterprise ES Operating System (Basic)
• $299 per computer per year -- Enterprise WS Operating System (Standard), and
• $179 per computer per year -- Enterprise WS Operating System (Basic)

According to Apple's web site, they tested their machine against two Dell Intel boxes (Dell Dimension 8300 (P4) and Dell Precision 650 (Dual Xeon)) running Red Hat Linux 9.0 Professional (at Apple's request).

Intel states that Red Hat Linux 9.0 Professional is one of the Linux OS's currently available that "include optimizations for HT Technology and are currently eligible to carry the Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor with HT Technology logo".

Apple commissioned the benchmark from a company called Veritest. The full report (in .PDF format) including all hardware and software used is available from Veritest's web site.

This could make Intel take notice! Of course, this benchmark comes on the same day that Intel announces the 3.2GHz Pentium IV (and Xeon) processors. Go figure!

Of the published data on both (in SPEC processor benchmarks), Apple's Power Mac G5 generated a SPECfp_base2000 score of 840 and SPECint_base2000 score of 800, while Intel claims that their new 3.2 GHz processors get a SPECfp_base2000 score of 1252 and a SPECint_base2000 score of 1221.

And the SPIN goes on!

The ranting of a few delusional leaders in the FSF does not represent the opinion of the many professionals who use, develop, or promote Linux.

One would think so, but this delusion is has spread much further than just the FSF.

I haven't even heard RMS weigh in on the SCO lawsuit, so why drag his distinctively weird opinions into this?

Because you brought up Communism and how you are disgusted by the label. Unfortunately, SCO's protest signs had a ring of truth to them... That ring of truth is all you need to coerce public perception.

Yes. What's your point?

The Linux "Community" should be more concerned about the bad public image they are creating for themselves.

Clustering is nice and all, but it's really just a linux gimmick. When you factor in power and staffage, it's much easier and cheaper just to get one really beastly computer than 20 old ones clustered.

I'm sure Brin and Page would love to hear more about your unique insights into the cost-effectiveness of Linux clusters.

http://www.internetwk.com/lead/lead060100.htm
http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/2000/press _google.html
[each link opens in new window]

1) Unreal Tournment 2003, Enemy Territory, Quake3, Neverwinter Nights, etc. And much, much more with Wine such as Soldier of Fortune 2.

2) Grip, VERY good CD Ripping app. Will auto download CDDB, run the encoder of your choice, etc. As for raytracing Povray can do a lot too, but you just need a good modeler, such as Kpovmodeler. As for a one click installer, check out RPMs or RedHat's Package Management System, looks just like Install Shield.

3) KDE,Gnome,etc. You DO know that they can be themed to look just like the crappy Windows GUI too don't you?

The kind of support Red Hat provide is not the same kind as the kind a helpdesk provides.

Red Hat are there to support the help desk. An answer of, "Umm, dunno" is not acceptable. If they don't know the answer, they have to be able to say, "we'll get our engineers right on it, you'll have an answer soon". They can't do that for a piece of code they have no expertise on.

Support in this context also means patches and updates. Obviously if you install your own stuff, and then get rooted because of a bug in that, you can't expect Red Hat to take the fall for it, hence, no support for you. Maybe they could be more flexible about it.

Your examples are not valid here.

Why not? If RH have no expertise on a piece of code, what difference does it make where it came from?

It is not fair for a distribution, who should be promoting competition rather than inhibiting it, to disallow use of software because of personal issues.

Personal issues? What personal issues? Yeah, some RH employees have (technical) doubts about the reliability of ReiserFS. That's not personal, if they don't trust Hans' work for whatever reason, he should try and convince them (or customers choose somebody less conservative).

I'm glad Linus has enough foresight to include it in the kernel.

If Linus includes it in the kernel and people use it and it goes wrong, they have nothing on Linus. On the other hand, Red Hat is there partially to take the blame for things like that. It's a whole different set of rules.

There was another reply about Mandrake and SuSE, which I'll answer here as well. Red Hat make ALL their money from support, as (virtually) all their software is GPLd and always has been. Mandrake and SuSE on the other hand both sell their distro and are far more reliant upon support from home users. And I think you'll find that they are similarly inflexible with respect to "bending" your support contract, if they choose different components to do so then the market will decide.

Now, I agree it'd be nice to include ReiserFS in RH Linux, ie the unsupported version meant for hackers and hobbyists. The relevant bug is here, so why not go and vote for it (but try not to spam the bug with "me too" comments). The reason given there for not including it is lack of time to integrate with the installer. BS or the truth? You decide, nobody forces you to use Red Hat.

"...The Velocity Engine is in the 970 so it's pretty clear that Apple is going to be using it..."

What does this prove? IBM has stated that they are going to use the 970 in their own Linux systems, and AltiVec support for linux exists and has been implemented.

In addition, Steve Jobs apparently is satisfied with the G4 roadmap.

We'll know for sure in a week. Well, maybe the night before if we're lucky.

(tig)
"We do not inherit the land from our ancestors"
"We borrow it from our children"

It was built using the latest binutils (2.13.2.1)

Too late, binutils 2.14 is released ....

"Linux is growing in importance in the mindset of business and government."

You don't seriously believe this, do you? Linux popularity is on a tremendous decline. The hype is gone, the bill has come due and Linux has failed to deliver.

The desperation of the zealots is shown by their change of direction. i.e. the move to mandate it through government legislation.

"It seems nearly every week I read of another increase in mindshare and the FUD from the naysayers is not going to make it go away. "

Of course, because you only read news sources which conform to your point of view.

"Desktop acceptance may be on the horizon still, but it is only a question of time, since Linux is powering along in the server market."

Of course the only way to achieve this is to outlaw other alternatives because you find it impossible to compete.

Another way (which happens to be the way we do it where I work) is to make a master OS image, store it on a central server, and rsync it down to / on every node. Updates are made to the master OS image and then get automatically propagated down to every node. When new or replacement nodes are deployed, we use RedHat's KickStart system to install a base OS on them, then rsync down the master image. We maintain over 700 nodes this way.

It doesn't conflict. All of the software is GPL. There are two packages in Red Hat that you need to be careful of, redhat-artwork and redhat-logos. If you replace those two packages with equivalent packages which contain artwork and logos not trademarked by Red Hat, you can distribute the software all you want.

You have an interesting point. Checking in the SRPMS directory for AS, I see only redhat-logos, and no redhat-artwork rpm. Looking into redhat-logos, I see that the information contained within it includes some distribution permissions that are in conflict with the ones it lists on its website. Namely:

Red Hat, Inc. grants you the right to use the Package during the normal operation of other software programs that call upon the Package. Red Hat, Inc. grants to you the right and license to copy and redistribute the Package, but only in conjunction with copying or redistributing additional software packages that call upon the Package during the normal course of operation. Such rights are granted to you without fee, provided that:

1. The above copyright notice and this license are included with each copy you make, and they remain intact and are not altered, deleted, or modified in any way;
2. You do not modify the Package, or the appearance of any or all of the Logos in any manner; and
3. You do not use any or all of the Logos as, or as part of, a trademark, trade name, or trade identifier; or in any other fashion except as set forth in this license.

Which appears to say that I am free to use the package and redistribute it without modification. Also, I can clearly see that this package is not subject to the GPL, and thus GPL concerns should not apply.

Again, though, I see an inconsistency. Each inconsistency seems to be replaced by another one the further down I dig. Is there a resolution to this which is completely self-consistent that I'm just missing?

But you can't get the software without agreeing to their support terms. If you compile it from source, they claim distribution would violate their trademark rights. (Mandrake argued this before.)

Ok, I see two issues here. First, you can get all of the SRPMS (i.e., all of the source to build your own) from http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/ 2.1AS/en/os/i386/SRPMS/, which I located by going to the download directory for 9, going up a few directories, and selecting enterprise instead of 9. Not intuitive, but the source is technically available, as per the GPL.

On to your second point. The issue of trademarks being embedded into a GPL released program wasn't addressed in this article, and that may be an area worthy of an article of its very own. From the license agreement at http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_2-1.html, I see (caps original):

THE "RED HAT" TRADEMARK AND RED HAT'S "SHADOWMAN" LOGO ARE REGISTERED TRADEMARKS OF RED HAT IN THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES. WHILE THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT ALLOWS CUSTOMER TO COPY MODIFY AND DISTRIBUTE THE SOFTWARE, IT DOES NOT PERMIT CUSTOMER TO DISTRIBUTE THE SOFTWARE UTILIZING RED HAT'S TRADEMARKS. CUSTOMER SHOULD READ THE INFORMATION FOUND AT http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/ BEFORE DISTRIBUTING A COPY OF THE SOFTWARE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED. IN ADDITION, IF CUSTOMER MAKES A COMMERCIAL REDISTRIBUTION OF THE SOFTWARE AND (A) IT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN AN EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN RED HAT'S TRADEMARK GUIDELINES, (B) IT HAS NOT ENTERED INTO A REDISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH RED HAT, OR (C) IT DO NOT HAVE A TRADEMARK LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH RED HAT, THEN CUSTOMER MUST MODIFY THE FILES IDENTIFIED AS REDHAT-LOGOS AND ANACONDA-IMAGES SO AS TO REMOVE ALL USE OF IMAGES CONTAINING THE "RED HAT" TRADEMARK OR RED HAT'S SHADOW MAN LOGO. NOTE THAT MERE DELETION OF THOSE FILES MAY CORRUPT THE SOFTWARE.

I agree that this conflicts with the GPL s.6&7:

6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.

7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

The conflict is with the statement Each time you redistribute the Program ... , the recipient ... receives a license from the original licensor to ... distribute ... the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. That is to say, imposing a requirement that trademarked content must be removed from a distributed GPL'd package before redistributing is to impo

But you can't get the software without agreeing to their support terms. If you compile it from source, they claim distribution would violate their trademark rights. (Mandrake argued this before.)

Ok, I see two issues here. First, you can get all of the SRPMS (i.e., all of the source to build your own) from http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/ 2.1AS/en/os/i386/SRPMS/, which I located by going to the download directory for 9, going up a few directories, and selecting enterprise instead of 9. Not intuitive, but the source is technically available, as per the GPL.

On to your second point. The issue of trademarks being embedded into a GPL released program wasn't addressed in this article, and that may be an area worthy of an article of its very own. From the license agreement at http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_2-1.html, I see (caps original):

THE "RED HAT" TRADEMARK AND RED HAT'S "SHADOWMAN" LOGO ARE REGISTERED TRADEMARKS OF RED HAT IN THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES. WHILE THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT ALLOWS CUSTOMER TO COPY MODIFY AND DISTRIBUTE THE SOFTWARE, IT DOES NOT PERMIT CUSTOMER TO DISTRIBUTE THE SOFTWARE UTILIZING RED HAT'S TRADEMARKS. CUSTOMER SHOULD READ THE INFORMATION FOUND AT http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/ BEFORE DISTRIBUTING A COPY OF THE SOFTWARE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED. IN ADDITION, IF CUSTOMER MAKES A COMMERCIAL REDISTRIBUTION OF THE SOFTWARE AND (A) IT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN AN EXCEPTION PROVIDED IN RED HAT'S TRADEMARK GUIDELINES, (B) IT HAS NOT ENTERED INTO A REDISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH RED HAT, OR (C) IT DO NOT HAVE A TRADEMARK LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH RED HAT, THEN CUSTOMER MUST MODIFY THE FILES IDENTIFIED AS REDHAT-LOGOS AND ANACONDA-IMAGES SO AS TO REMOVE ALL USE OF IMAGES CONTAINING THE "RED HAT" TRADEMARK OR RED HAT'S SHADOW MAN LOGO. NOTE THAT MERE DELETION OF THOSE FILES MAY CORRUPT THE SOFTWARE.

I agree that this conflicts with the GPL s.6&7:

6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.

7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

The conflict is with the statement Each time you redistribute the Program ... , the recipient ... receives a license from the original licensor to ... distribute ... the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. That is to say, imposing a requirement that trademarked content must be removed from a distributed GPL'd package before redistributing is to impo

As seen at dell,
Red Hat Linux AS 2.1 is supplied only as part of a SUBSCRIPTION service.

And from the Red Hat Advanced Server and Services Agreement: The term âoeInstalled Serversâ means the number of servers on which Customer installs Red Hat Linux Advanced Server.

And, lastly, from the RHAS Agreement above: 4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed Servers, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed Server.

To paraphrase, the product "Red Hat Advanced Server" is a service which, incidentally, includes a package of files on installation CDs. If you install the 'package', you must pay for it.

It is clear that they are selling a service, not a software license, but I agree that it gets a little fuzzy when you start talking about requiring the 'service' if you install the set of files.

Ahhhh, whatever.

Clearly this post is newsworthy. While the issue may be cut-and-dry to some, it is confusing to others. I'm not saying anything new here, but I have worded things in a way that I think does a decent job of clarifying the situation:

Red Hat realizes that they will never make a profit selling Free Software all by itself, so they don't even bother trying. When they "sell" software, what they are actually selling is a bundle of both software and service. The bundle is both GPL and non-GPL. Specifically, the "GPL" part is the software, and the "non-GPL" part is the service. Because it contains both GPL work and non-GPL work, and each are distinctly separated, Red Hat is allowed to release the bundle (as a whole) under non-free terms, ergo the EULA.

You are still free to use the GPL part only, and you can download RHAS from Red Hat and use it for free (beer and speech).

However, as part of the EULA of the RHAS (software and service) bundle, you in effect agree that you will not use the GPL-only version of RHAS, and you agree that you will allow Red Hat to check your compliance if they wish. Because this bundle is collectively not GPLed Red Hat is allowed to attach any provisions that are legal under contract law.

If you don't agree to the terms of the RHAS (software and service) bundle, you can continue to use the GPL-only RHAS, you just won't get any support from Red Hat. If, however, you agree to those terms and then violate them, well, you get what anyone deserves when they violate an agreement.

Take a look here, and scroll down to the two paragraphs that begin with "carefully read the following terms and conditions" in upper-case. (The lameness filter won't let me quote it here, even in a blockquote.) It seems to contradict what you say, and seems to conflict with the GPL. I'm not a lawyer, but I do read English.

First, unlike the slashdot editors, ;) IANAL. That said, I'm fairly sure a lot of people aren't reading this, and haven't looked at the RHEL license. As if they ever do. ;) (The letter mentioned in the article is only concerned with RH Enterprise Linux versions by the way, and the clauses do not appear in the other versions as far as I could see.) Really though there are some serious points here. I'd suggest that everyone who is really interested in this should go look at the license agreements online on Red Hat's site. Some other people have already quoted some of it, but I'll give a brief summary here of the questionable parts.

This Subscription Agreement (the "Agreement") is between Red Hat, Inc. ("Red Hat") and any purchaser or user ("Customer") of Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS (or Red Hat Linux Advanced Server), Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES or Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS (collectively, "Red Hat Enterprise Linux" or "the Software").
PLEASE READ THIS AGREEMENT CAREFULLY BEFORE PURCHASING OR USING RED HAT ENTERPRISE LINUX. BY USING OR PURCHASING RED HAT ENTERPRISE LINUX, CUSTOMER SIGNIFIES ITS ASSENT TO THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE ACTING ON BEHALF OF AN ENTITY, THEN YOU REPRESENT THAT YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THAT ENTITY. IF CUSTOMER DOES NOT ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, THEN IT MUST NOT USE OR PURCHASE RED HAT ENTERPRISE LINUX.

Read that carefully. (just like it says! heh) It says that if you do not agree to the Subscription Agreement then you must not use RHEL. It doesn't say you can't use RHEN or Red Hat Support Services, it says you can not use Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System.

Here it says clearly, if you want to install RHEL on additional systems, you must purchase support for each system from Red Hat. Notice that it uses the term "Installed System" which it has already defined as "the hardware on which the Software is installed" and the Software was defined in the first part to mean RHEL in general. It does not mention RHEN or support services. It is strictly defined as hardware that has RHEL installed on it.

The Agreement also goes on to talk about various auditing and fines for not buying support for all your systems, but it looks like we've pretty much already gotten to the primary problems I think. If you use RHEL (which is licensed under the Gnu GPL) and you haven't purchased support, you are in violation of the Agreement. Then again, I don't see how the Agreement can be valid, since it places additional restrictions on the use of the software, which is prohibited by the Gnu GPL.