Oracle UEK Kernel On CentOS

Home » CentOS » Oracle UEK Kernel On CentOS
CentOS 21 Comments

Hello CentOS Guys,

What do you think about the Oracle Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel? Since Release 2 of the UEK Kernel, all updates are available free of charge > http://public-yum.oracle.com/

My questions:

  • Does the Oracle UEK kernel really perform better than the default CentOS kernel?
  • Technical advantages and disadvantages?
  • Would you use the Oracle UEK Kernel on CentOS?

21 thoughts on - Oracle UEK Kernel On CentOS

  • Chris wrote:

    Do you understand what OUL is, a modified version of RHEL? And no, I have grave doubts you could use that kernel with the standard repositories for CentOS: I’d give you a 95% confidence that trying to update most things would give you tons of unsatisfied dependencies.

    mark “and I wouldn’t support Larry Ellison if I have any options”

  • Yeah, sticking it to the company that’s developing and supporting open source GPL Java sounds sensible…
    *sarcasm*

    FC

  • This isn’t the scientific linux users list and this type of thing isn’t going to go over any better here than it did there. Oracle has a well-earned bad reputation for their business practices in their treatment of Redhat and their customers and people in this industry have a long memory. You like Oracle and appear to be a staunch supporter, that’s fine. Just please don’t expect the vast majority of subscribers to this list to feel the same.

    John

    The ability to focus attention on important things is a defining characteristic of intelligence.

    — Robert J. Shiller (1946-), American economist, academic, and author,
    Irrational Exuberance (2006)

  • 2012/7/18 :

    It is very easy without any dependencies to install.

    You need only:

    [ol6_UEK_latest]
    name=Latest Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel for Oracle Linux $releasever
    ($basearch)
    baseurl=http://public-yum.oracle.com/repo/OracleLinux/OL6/UEK/latest/$basearch/
    gpgkey=http://public-yum.oracle.com/RPM-GPG-KEY-oracle-ol6
    gpgcheck=1
    enabled=1

  • Uh-huh.

    OEL for “free” is a calculated move to poach yet more users from Redhat, and in this specific instance, also _directly_ targeted at CentOS users.

    btrfs on its own doesn’t make up for a fraction of the ill-will they’ve garnered in stealing users from Redhat by purposely undercutting Redhat support costs.

    Not only biting that hand that feeds you but tearing it off and then beating you with it doesn’t earn much good will.

    Perhaps if they were actually putting out their _own_ distribution instead of leeching off Redhat’s work and then _making money off of it_
    it perchance might be a different story.

    John

    “Since every individual is accountable ultimately to the self, the formation of that self demands our utmost care and attention.”

    — A Bene Gesserit teaching spoken by Miles Teg in “Chapterhouse: Dune”
    by Frank Herbert

  • 2012/7/18 Fernando Cassia :

    No, it’s not trolling!

    I’m really interested in the technical differences and advantages.

  • It’s called “free market competition”. It brings down costs for the consumer.

    Sun took Novell’s SuSE Enterprise Desktop for its short-lived Java Desktop System (JDS) Linux.

    As long as they comply with the GPL rules, it’s all fair game.

    FC

  • No it’s not. It’s called leeching.

    Thanks for a good laugh. The only thing that will happen when companies switch from RHEL to Oracle’s EOL is that they will get up-sold like there’s no tomorrow and Larry & minions will take them for every penny &
    first born they got.

    Iirc there was a commercial arrangement. You know the free market kind where money is paid for goods and services as in the opposite from leeching.

    Larry is that you?

    Regards, Patrick

  • T24gV2VkLCBKdWwgMTgsIDIwMTIgYXQgMTA6MzkgUE0sIFBhdHJpY2sgTGlzdHMKPGNlbnRvcy1s aXN0QHB1enpsZWQueHM0YWxsLm5sPiB3cm90ZToKPiBMYXJyeSBpcyB0aGF0IHlvdT8KClJPRkwu Li4gSSB1c2UgRmVkb3JhIG9uIGRlc2t0b3BzLiBVc2VkIFN1biBKRFMgYmVmb3JlLCBhbmQgU3VT
    RSBiZWZvcmUKdGhhdC4gQ2FsZGVyYSBPcGVubGludXggMTIgeWVhcnMgYWdvLiBJQk0gT1MvMiBi ZWZvcmUgdGhhdC4KClRvZGF5LCBvbmUgb2YgbXkgc2VydmVycyBydW4gQ2VudE9TLiBCdXQgd2hl biBJIHBsYW4gdG8gc3RhcnQgc29tZQpjb21tZXJjaWFsIHNlcnZpY2VzIG9uIGFub3RoZXIgc2Vy dmVyLCBJIHBsYW4gdG8gcHVyY2hhc2UgYW4gT3JhY2xlCnN1YnNjcmlwdGlvbiBwbGFuIGJlY2F1
    c2UgaXTCtHMgb25lIHRoaXJkIG9mIHRoZSBSZWRIYXQgcHJpY2UuIE1vbmV5CmRvZXNuwrR0IGdy b3cgb24gdHJlZXMgZm9yIG1lLgoKSWYgT1JDTCBnaXZlcyBtZSBzdXBwb3J0IGFuZCBhbiBvcHRp bWl6ZWQga2VybmVsLCB0aGVuIGZhaXIgZ2FtZS4gV2hvCmFtIEkgdG8gY29tcGxhaW4/LgoKT3Jh Y2xlIGVtcGxveWVlcywgb24gRXZpbCBMYXJyecK0cyBwYXlyb2xsLCBhbHNvIGNvbnRyaWJ1dGUg dG8gdGhlCkxpbnV4IGtlcm5lbCBhbmQgb3RoZXIgbGludXggYXJlYXMgYXMgR25vbWUgYW5kIGRy aXZlcnMuCgpodHRwOi8vb3NzLm9yYWNsZS5jb20vCgpBIHNpbXBsZSBnb29nbGUgc2VhcmNoIHNo b3dzIE9SQ0wgZW1wbG95ZWVzIG9uIHRoZSBHbm9tZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3RzIG9ubHk6CgpodHRw Oi8vZ29vLmdsL0p2MWtiCgpPbiB0aGUgZmlyc3Qgc2NyZWVuCkRlcm1vdCBNY0NsdXNrZXkgKGRl cm1vdC5tY2NsdXNrZXlAb3IqY2xlLmNvbSkKQ2FsdW0gQmVuc29uIDxjYWx1bS5iZW5zb25Ab3Iq Y2xlLmNvbT4KSmVmZiBDYWkgKGplZmYuY2FpQG9yKmNsZS5jb20pCkxpIFl1YW4gKGxlZS55dWFu QG9yKmNsZSBjb20pCkVtaWx5IENoZW4gIHlhbmcuY2hlbkBvcipjbGUuY29tCkJyaWFuIENhbWVy b24gPGJyaWFuLmNhbWVyb25Ab3IqY2xlLmNvbT4KTWlrZSBPbGl2ZXIgPG1pa2Uub2xpdmVyQG9y KmNsZSBjb20+CgpUaGF0IHNvdW5kcyB0byBtZSBsaWtlIGNvbnRyaWJ1dGluZywgbm90IG9ubHkg ImxlZWNoaW5nIi4KCkJ1dCBoZXksIEkgZ3Vlc3MgdGhlIGZhY3RzIHN0b3BwZWQgYmVpbmcgaW1w b3J0YW50IGxvbmcgYWdvLCBhbmQgd2hhdAptYXR0ZXJzIHRoZXNlIGRheXMgYXJlIHBlcmNlcHRp b25zIGFuZCBmZWVsaW5ncywgc28gaXTCtHMgY29vbCB0byAiaGF0ZQpldmlsIExhcnJ5Ii4gTXVz dCBiZSB3aHkgaGUgZGlkIHRoZSByZXZvbHV0aW9uYXJ5IChhbmQgYWhlYWQgb2YgaXRzCnRpbWUp IGxvdyBjb3N0ICJUaGlua05JQyIgY29tcHV0ZXIgZm9yIGVkdWNhdGlvbmFsIG1hcmtldHMgYmFz ZWQgb24KTGludXggYW5kIE5ldHNjYXBlLCAxMiB5ZWFycyBhZ28uCgpBbmQgScK0bGwgc2F5IGl0
    IGFnYWluOiBJIHJ1biBtdWx0aXBsZSBPU3MgaW5jbHVkaW5nIEZlZG9yYSwgeWV0IHdoaWxlCkkg c3VwcG9ydCBPcmFjbGXCtHMgb3BlbiBzb3VyY2UgcHJvamVjdHMsIEnCtG0gbm90IHBhcnRpY3Vs YXJseQppbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIGFueSBvZiB0aGUgZmlybXPCtCBub24tZnJlZSBvciBwcm9waWV0
    YXJ5IHByb2R1Y3RzIGdlYXJlZAp0b3dhcmRzIC1hbmQgcHJpY2VkIGZvci0gdGhlIEZvcnR1bmUg NTAwLi4uCgpUaGVyZcK0cyByb29tIGZvciBldmVyeW9uZSBpbiB0aGUgbWFya2V0Li4uIFJIRUws IENlbnRPUyBhbmQgT3JhY2xlIExpbnV4Li4uCkZDCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCkNlbnRPUyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKQ2VudE9TQGNlbnRvcy5v cmcKaHR0cDovL2xpc3RzLmNlbnRvcy5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9jZW50b3MK

  • No, java is not open source. Didn’t you know that the APIs are patented. You did see that Oracle sued Google for making a Derivative work of java, right? Open source is open source … this suing people for using open source to create derivative works is buillshit … however it is standard operating procedure for Oracle.

    You did see the majority of the developers for OpenOffice jumped ship and went to LibreOffice as soon as Sun was bought by Oracle, right? Why do you think that is?

  • So how does iced-tea fit into this picture?

    Keith

    ———————————————————

  • It fits in fine until Oracle decides that it wants to sue because they think there is some money to be made. Then APIs are patentable, GPL does not give patent permissions, etc. The lawsuits will then fly.

    If Android was not wildly popular, Oracle would not have done anything about it. Since it is, they want $$$.

    If they think there is $$$ for them, they will pull the same thing again in a heartbeat … be it Java or MySQL or Berkley DB. They gave up Open Office to the Apache Foundation because of the mass exodus of developers, or it would be in the same boat. I just do not trust them.

  • Johnny Hughes wrote:

    And then there’s their hardware acquisition, Sun. Tech support for hardware is what I refer to as self-abuse. Just don’t buy it.

    mark

  • Like in all events in History, there’s two versions of events. Here’s Shuttleworth’s http://ho.io/libreoffice

    It had to do with a faction’s vocal opposition to the Sun Contributor Agreement more than anything else.

    Oh, and the freedom fighters at LO caused the killing of the commercial build of OO.o, namely StarOffice (which ORCL had renamed
    “Oracle Open Office” -sans the .org-, and developed in parallel with OO.o, which, at the time of the fork, was at v3.4alpha).

    Of course, that’s standard procedure for MS-Novell… remeber they were the first to fork OO.o with their “Go-OO” with patches to support MS-OOXML (which Sun refused to include).

    But we’re drifting off-topic, I fear. Whatever floats your boat. FC

  • Money is so evil! how they dare license a technology… even if it’s open source…
    *sarcasm*

    http://www.businessinsider.com/java-inventor-google-totally-slimed-sun-2012-4

    Java Inventor: ‘Google Totally Slimed Sun’
    Matt Rosoff | Apr. 30, 2012, 12:38 PM

    Java creator James Gosling thinks that Google “totally slimed” Sun by using big parts of Java without paying a license, and says that he agrees with Oracle in the lawsuit between the companies.

    That may be a bit surprising, because Gosling quit his job at Sun shortly after Oracle bought the company, and has been critical of Oracle in some blog posts since then. Then, last March, Gosling took a job at Google. He’s since quit that job to work for a startup.

    Gosling is widely considered the father of Java, as he invented the first version of the Java language and other pieces of the platform back in 1994.

    On Saturday, Gosling wrote a brief blog post clarifying his position on the Oracle-Google case after a news article got it wrong.

    As he put it:

    Just because Sun didn’t have patent suits in our genetic code doesn’t mean we didn’t feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun. We were all really disturbed, even [then-CEO] Jonathan [Schwartz]: he just decided to put on a happy face and tried to turn lemons into lemonade, which annoyed a lot of folks at Sun.

    FC

  • You could make exactly that same argument about Linux, and probably on better legal grounds except that SCO ran out of money before winning a case – but somebody, somewhere must own those rights now.

    Anyone can sue anyone else for anything. At least in the Oracle/java case there are some court decisions falling out that seem to limit the potential damage.

    The same risk applies to everything, opensource or not. Someone can always appear claiming to own a patent covering the functionality. In most opensource projects, no one checks, and even where they do it is possible to have mistakes or differences of opinion.

  • You are oversimplifying things here. The phone version of java was never GPL’d. and that is the part that google reverse-engineered . On the other hand, API’s can’t really be protected because they are two sides of the same thing. If a user is allowed to use one side, someone else has to be allowed to duplicate the other side. Without that concept, linux and the *bsds would never be allowed to duplicate the unix APIs.

  • Yes, you finally understood. Thanks :)

    http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7/
    http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/11/12Oracle-and-Apple-Announce-OpenJDK-Project-for-Mac-OS-X.html http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/l0mx0/twitter_joins_jcp_and_openjdk_project/
    https://dev.twitter.com/blog/twitter-open-source-and-jvm http://code.google.com/p/openjdk-osx-build/
    OpenJDK for the Nokia N9 – MeeGo http://labb.zafena.se/?pS2

    But we’re drifting topic. OK, let’s leave it at that, you hate Oracle and Ellison. Fine.

    The OP asked about running Oracle kernel on CentOS, I told him it’d be better to run the full Oracle Linux shebang to avoid any compatibility issues or problems.

    I prefer to run both CentOS and ORCL Linux on different machines for different purposes. I don’t have much more to say… ;)
    FC

LEAVE A COMMENT