Questioning RH's decisions to remain PLUS A BIT...
Alexandre Oliva
aoliva at redhat.com
Thu Nov 6 02:25:16 UTC 2003
On Nov 5, 2003, Mark Hutchinson <rhce at cybersurf.com> wrote:
> I think that when he says "Red Hat cuts RH 9 support short"
> He probably means short compared to what long term users have come to expect
> from RedHat.
Maybe the expectations needed a reality check, provided by the kind
reminder than RHN sent the other day? The following pages are all
about 9 months old!
http://web.archive.org/web/20030206082133/www.redhat.com/apps/support/errata/index.html
http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:QYh_77Z6j9YJ:www.owlriver.com/support/rh-eol.pdf+Red+Hat+Linux+8.0+EOL&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/27/239231&mode=thread&tid=110
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/29053.html
> I was still updating 7.1 servers up till not long ago. It is what,
> 2 years or more since 7 came out? 9 is not longer supported as of
> April 2004? I think that is shorter.
Yeah, but that's old news. Why all the fuss now?
> but the 80$ box sets need to stay and have the guarantee of a year
> or 2 of updates.
Looks like you just found a nice niche for a Fedora support start-up
:-) Red Hat doesn't plan on doing it, but if there is such a need
that you claim, others will. It's a free market, after all.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list