Redhat in CentOS? I type help and the first line says redhat. Are we paranoid about red..t?
Clayton
You can tell the caliber of a man by his gun–c. kirkwood
5 thoughts on - How Serious Are We About Not Wanting To See…
I don’t see the concern. CentOS is a binary-compatible clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Further, Red Hat sponsors and supports the CentOS
project, providing confidence in it’s long-term survival which business looking for a flavour linux want to see.
CentOS users should be happy about Red Hat, not scared of it. Likewise, CentOS is valuable to Red Hat as it’s the source of their future customers. So it’s a very mutually beneficial relationship.
digimer
Personally, I am agnostic. I’ve just read thru CentOS documentation that there is a big effort to remove all upstream personalities from CentOS. Personally, I don’t see why RH is doing this. I would think that it undermines RH. But I’m still new/old to all of this. It used to be the big argument was between Unix from Berkeley(4.? I think) and SysIII/V. Always always battles for turf.
Clayton
It’s a trademark issue. CentOS is not Red Hat, so they can’t use Red Hat’s trademarks. Nothing more, nothing less.
May be worth nothing that CentOS isn’t the only distro that does this[1]. It is probably the more well known, though.
Typically the way to look at it is :
– does that string imply that you are running Red Hat Enterprise Linux
– does that string imply this is code curated by Red Hat
– is that an assertion of the product itself
what we want to do is remove Red Hat TM’s and replace them with CentOS
content, but we also want to remove content that might imply the code or the platform or the product is a Red Hat one ( or with support ).
Beyond that for (c) notices and places where there is a red hat string that implies this is code curated by/at/for Red Hat then thats fine to leave in. eg: the gcc –version output states Red Hat, since this gcc codebase is the one maintained upstream.
5 thoughts on - How Serious Are We About Not Wanting To See…
I don’t see the concern. CentOS is a binary-compatible clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Further, Red Hat sponsors and supports the CentOS
project, providing confidence in it’s long-term survival which business looking for a flavour linux want to see.
CentOS users should be happy about Red Hat, not scared of it. Likewise, CentOS is valuable to Red Hat as it’s the source of their future customers. So it’s a very mutually beneficial relationship.
digimer
Personally, I am agnostic. I’ve just read thru CentOS documentation that there is a big effort to remove all upstream personalities from CentOS. Personally, I don’t see why RH is doing this. I would think that it undermines RH. But I’m still new/old to all of this. It used to be the big argument was between Unix from Berkeley(4.? I think) and SysIII/V. Always always battles for turf.
Clayton
It’s a trademark issue. CentOS is not Red Hat, so they can’t use Red Hat’s trademarks. Nothing more, nothing less.
May be worth nothing that CentOS isn’t the only distro that does this[1]. It is probably the more well known, though.
Pete.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux_derivatives
Typically the way to look at it is :
– does that string imply that you are running Red Hat Enterprise Linux
– does that string imply this is code curated by Red Hat
– is that an assertion of the product itself
what we want to do is remove Red Hat TM’s and replace them with CentOS
content, but we also want to remove content that might imply the code or the platform or the product is a Red Hat one ( or with support ).
Beyond that for (c) notices and places where there is a red hat string that implies this is code curated by/at/for Red Hat then thats fine to leave in. eg: the gcc –version output states Red Hat, since this gcc codebase is the one maintained upstream.
Finally, when in doubt, bring it up!