whitebox vs. fedora

[Gary Cote]

> 
> OK, Yesterday was the first time I heard about Whitebox Linux. What is
> different between WB Linux and Fedora, and how does WB Linux 
> compare with RHEL,
> does anyone know?
> 


Even though Redhat charges beaucoup bucks for RHEL, they
still make the source RPMS available. So, theoretically,
if one went through the trouble of acquiring and compiling
all the source RPMS, you could produce something that is
binary-equivalent to RHEL.

In a nutshell, that's what whitebox linux strives to do.
They compile all the SRPMS and then make those binary
RPMs available for download. 

Note that I said theoretically. I've gotten the impression
that whitebox linux is not an exact reproduction of RHEL.
Maybe redhat wasn't entirely accurate with the SRPM list. 
Maybe some additional RPMs were need to satisfy build deps. 
Maybe WB linux decided to tweak it some to meet their needs. 
I'll let those who are more knowledgeable on the subject
comment on that. 

Having said all that ...

You can read through the previous WB linux thread for
further insight into the diffs vis-a-vis fedora and RHEL.

HTH