RHEL without License?

[Steven Jones]

I think (legally) you have to pay for the subscription whether you patch
or not.......

There are RHEL copies like whitebox?, but if your clients are thinking
along these lines I would suggest Debian or Fedora.

Or better yet don't deal with these clients.....I would walk away if
clients asked me that.....

Regards

Thing 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rik Herrin [mailto:rikherrin at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 14 July 2005 8:21 a.m.
To: redhat-list at redhat.com
Subject: Re: Re: RHEL without License?

Ugo,
  I know that one of the RHEL clones might be better
in this situation.  But I am asking because when I
come to propose RHEL to clients, they sometimes ask
what their situation would be legally if after a year
or two, they wanted to keep their systems running but
without paying support.  Would they be forced to shut
down these systems (I think this is the case with
Windows Server which is probably why they are asking
since they don't want to be in the same trap)?  Or
could they continue running them and just not get
updates from RHN?  Thanks for your input.  

> Rik Herrin wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for your reply Ian.  But it there any
> > documentation or anything documenting that you can
do
> > so?  Also, in reference to the question of
downloading
> > the ISOs for free (30 day trial) and then
continuing
> > to use them after the 30 day trial period without
> > paying, is this legal?  Thanks for your time.
> 
> Aren't you better off using a clone like CentOS then
and give a few
> bucks here and there?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list