Downgrading from RHEL

[Andre Costa]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:11:31 -0500 (EST)
Tom Ryan <tomryan at camlaw.rutgers.edu> wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Andre Costa wrote:
> 
> > I guess I will go with Tom on this one: I believe the license is
> > referring to RHN on this specific clause. You two have just hit the
> > point: this is the exact reason why I started this thread -- to know
> > what happens to an installed RHEL server once the license expires
> > from the perspective of the system maintainer.
> > 
> > One possible scenario is, despite losing RHN, still being able to
> > maintain the system through public RHEL SRPM sites -- which should
> > be ok for usual package updates, but could be a problem for major
> > version upgrades (like RHEL 3.0 to RHEL3.x or 4.0).
> > 
> > The other possible scenario is that it is not feasible (either
> > legally or practically) to maintain a 'rogue' RHEL installation, and
> > ceasing to pay the license would mean a full reinstall. This would
> > be a no-go.
> 
> Thats a good question.. from their license, you grant them the right
> to allow them to audit you for 1 year after you end your license..

Well, on this case I would most likely have a tainted RHEL installation,
with non-RHEL packages; during "license lifetime" this would probably
mean I would have no right to support, but I am not really sure what
this would mean _after_ license expires (when I would not have
right to support anymore).

> I would suspect that as long as you only install 1 system using the
> iso image provided via your subscription within the 2 year period
> (i.e. subscribe for 1 year, cancel, wait 1 year).. you would be fine
> to discontinue and manually upgrade your system by downloading and 
> recompiling the SRPMS..
> 
> after the 2 year period is over, RHN's agreement seems to lose a few
> teeth in how they would enforce you from using the iso to install on a
> 2nd system and download and compile the SRPMS for updates..
> 
> again, I am not advocating anything illegal AND I am not a lawyer (no 
> acroynms to confuse anyone)..

Sure, no problem on my part =) We're just brainstorming, and that's
what I expected when I posted my question here. Thks for sharing your
ideas =) FYI I don't intend to do anything illegal -- that's actually
one of the reasons behind my posts: I want to know how (if) I could
proceed with RHEL after license expires _without_ going illegal.

Best,

Andre

-- 
Andre Oliveira da Costa