Re: Is Novel Suse not friendly to real linux world? and how about Red hat and Debian?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Star Liu wrote:
> I read a article about the IP issues among Microsoft, SCO, Novel Suse
> and the other Linux world yestorday. I felt quite angry about what
> Microsoft has done to Linux in order to keep its market in software.
> so i hope i can get more information about this.
> 1. If Novel Suse is so obviously not friendly to free software world,
> why so many people still use it? does it mean people who use Suse do
> not have the spirit of free software?
> 2. I also know that Enterprise Edition of Red hat is not a free
> distribution, so does it mean Red hat do not have the spirit of free
> software?
RHEL is teetering on the edge of non-free'd'ness.
It's not beer free, and BITS of it are not speech-free, but you're
paying for the support contract. RHEL is very open about
a) CentOS being a beer free RHEL without the support contract (and with
a bigger package set to boot)
b) Fedora being a totally speech-and-beer-free distribution that feeds
RHEL and Cent, and that the money from RHEL directly sponsors Fedora.
Red Hat _DO_ have a clear dedication to the FOSS movement, and are, in
my mind at about the same level as myself getting paid to
support/implement Debian systems.
> 3. Shall Debian follow the way of Red hat to have a nonfree enterprise edition?
> 4. Do Debian has the danger of IP lawsuits "created" by microsoft?
>
>
Knowing what you'd read to lead you to these conclusions would be handy.
Regards
Rich Healey
- --
Rich Healey - iTReign \ .''`. / healey.rich@gmail.com
Developer / Systems Admin \ : :' : / healey.rich@itreign.com
AIM: richohealey33 \ `. `' / richo@psych0tik.net
MSN: bitchohealey@hotmail.com \ `- / richohealey@hellboundhackers.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkjTSI0ACgkQLeTfO4yBSAfoRQCfaczFj/fOVxGPUDEpBIguiF1k
pGQAoLSGKHixerulJFrSCXecIXBGjdGM
=Ko/7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: