What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution? I know that Novell want to earn money with their Server Product, but I think most of the money will be made with additional services and addons, like the Novell Enterprise Services, Groupwise or eDirectory. -- Marcel Volz
Why ? Just configure the server you want during install. There's no Fedora Server version. You can configure Fedora as a server during your install so configure OpenSUSE as a server during your install too. You can still obtain the additional services from Novell like eDirectory, exteNd, etc, but you don't need a specific openSUSE Server Version to do that. Also, remember openSUSE isn't a "Novell product". It's a community Linux, that is supported by the Linux community. Again, much like Fedora. As a matter of fact, you don't even see openSUSE on Novell product list site ! Joseph Smith -www.javacard.info- On Sat, 2005-09-10 at 16:13 +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution?
I know that Novell want to earn money with their Server Product, but I think most of the money will be made with additional services and addons, like the Novell Enterprise Services, Groupwise or eDirectory.
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 16:30 schrieb Joseph Smith:
Why ? Just configure the server you want during install.
I know that i could use SUSE Linux as Server. That's what I'm doing very often at home and at my work.
There's no Fedora Server version. You can configure Fedora as a server during your install so configure OpenSUSE as a server during your install too.
But there is CentOS or Whitebox Linux. You get all OpenSource Packages from RedHat Enterprise Linux and Security Updates and Bugfixes for 5 years. All Hardware or Software that is known to work with RHEL, also work with CentOS. My wish is, to have the same with SUSE.
You can still obtain the additional services from Novell like eDirectory, exteNd, etc, but you don't need a specific openSUSE Server Version to do that. Also, remember openSUSE isn't a "Novell product". It's a community Linux, that is supported by the Linux community. Again, much like Fedora. As a matter of fact, you don't even see openSUSE on Novell product list site !
I don't want the services from Novell. All I want is a stable plattform, that didn't change often -> openSLES ?! -- Marcel Volz
On Saturday 10 September 2005 22:38, Marcel Volz wrote:
But there is CentOS or Whitebox Linux. You get all OpenSource Packages from RedHat Enterprise Linux and Security Updates and Bugfixes for 5 years. All Hardware or Software that is known to work with RHEL, also work with CentOS. My wish is, to have the same with SUSE.
centos and whitebox are not related to red hat. They are doing what they are doing without any cooperation from red hat at all. In fact, their business plan is to take as many customers away from red hat as they can. Tell me again why you expect Novell to help you with a similar business plan against SLES?
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 23:23 schrieb Anders Johansson:
On Saturday 10 September 2005 22:38, Marcel Volz wrote:
But there is CentOS or Whitebox Linux. You get all OpenSource Packages from RedHat Enterprise Linux and Security Updates and Bugfixes for 5 years. All Hardware or Software that is known to work with RHEL, also work with CentOS. My wish is, to have the same with SUSE.
centos and whitebox are not related to red hat. They are doing what they are doing without any cooperation from red hat at all. In fact, their business plan is to take as many customers away from red hat as they can.
Tell me again why you expect Novell to help you with a similar business plan against SLES?
I disagree with you. They are related, but not officially supported from RedHat. From the CentOS Website: "CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor. CentOS conforms fully with the upstream vendors redistribution policy and aims to be 100% binary compatible." There are many yum-repositories with additional rpm's that are not included in the offical RHEL. There also some derived distributions like Scientific Linux for universities or students that aim at a particular group of users. I think it would be nice to have some additional software repositories for SLES or some specialised distros with some special functionality. One think that comes in my mind is a SLES with additional Asterisk rpms, just like "Asterisk at home". -- Marcel Volz
Op zondag 11 september 2005 10:45, schreef Marcel Volz:
I think it would be nice to have some additional software repositories for SLES or some specialised distros with some special functionality.
One think that comes in my mind is a SLES with additional Asterisk rpms, just like "Asterisk at home".
Or a firewall CD based on openSUSE, just like: http://www.redwall-firewall.com/ -- Richard Bos Without a home the journey is endless
Richard Bos wrote:
Op zondag 11 september 2005 10:45, schreef Marcel Volz:
I think it would be nice to have some additional software repositories for SLES or some specialised distros with some special functionality.
One think that comes in my mind is a SLES with additional Asterisk rpms, just like "Asterisk at home".
Or a firewall CD based on openSUSE, just like: http://www.redwall-firewall.com/
there is a "project" page on opensuse, right for such things :-) using jigdo (for example) there should neither be necessary to have a special ftp repository, only link to the official one (and add the special part elsewhere) jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 10:45:05AM +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
centos and whitebox are not related to red hat. They are doing what they are doing without any cooperation from red hat at all. In fact, their business plan is to take as many customers away from red hat as they can.
Tell me again why you expect Novell to help you with a similar business plan against SLES?
I disagree with you. They are related, but not officially supported from RedHat. From the CentOS Website: "CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor.
OK. If RedHat would be in any way related, don't you think they would love to have their name mentioned somewhere? It is "derived from". It is NOT related _with_ RedHat. If you want to make an OS dericved from a prominent North American Enterprices (Novell in this case) please go ahead, but don't hold your breath for support from them. if I recall correctly, RedHat even has forbidden them by trial to use the name RedHat. That is, in my eyes, very telling how that relation is going. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 14:17 schrieb houghi:
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 10:45:05AM +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
OK. If RedHat would be in any way related, don't you think they would love to have their name mentioned somewhere? It is "derived from".
It is NOT related _with_ RedHat.
They are related in that form, that CentOS is built from publically available open source SRPMS provided by RedHat. There is no official relationship. Anyway we should better concentrate on openSUSE now.
If you want to make an OS dericved from a prominent North American Enterprices (Novell in this case) please go ahead, but don't hold your breath for support from them.
I don't want to make a derived distribtution, but maybe it's interesting for Novell to add some functionality/ packages. Let SLES form the core and the community could add some functionality. Just like it is now for SUSE Linux.
if I recall correctly, RedHat even has forbidden them by trial to use the name RedHat. That is, in my eyes, very telling how that relation is going.
I think you're better informed about CentOS than i am. :-) My orginal itention was to hear if there is somebody else, who want a openSUSE Version which aims at being used as server. Are you intersestd in a server version? Maybe, as Pascal Bleser already written, a projekt like SUPER is the way to go? (Ideas are welcome!) -- Marcel Volz
Marcel Volz wrote:
My orginal itention was to hear if there is somebody else, who want a openSUSE Version which aims at being used as server. Are you intersestd in a server version?
I definitvely am. no X, ssh, http, ftp, postfix, qpopper, samba, squirell, Susefirewall, squid, bind, mysql, phpMyAdmin, mediawiki... installed by default. noweday it's a hard work to make a server run (I did recently with suse 9.0.) jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 17:05 schrieb jdd:
Marcel Volz wrote:
My orginal itention was to hear if there is somebody else, who want a openSUSE Version which aims at being used as server. Are you intersestd in a server version?
I definitvely am. no X, ssh, http, ftp, postfix, qpopper, samba, squirell, Susefirewall, squid, bind, mysql, phpMyAdmin, mediawiki... installed by default.
I think everybody has different needs with his server, so I would like to see a more slim minimal installation. And then everybody could pick their own server packages. The second think that could be improved is documentation. I like the documentation from SUSE Linux, but there could be more. Maybe some people could add more some server specific documentation to then next SUSE Linux Version. -- MfG, Marcel Volz
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 07:15:34PM +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 17:05 schrieb jdd:
Marcel Volz wrote:
My orginal itention was to hear if there is somebody else, who want a openSUSE Version which aims at being used as server. Are you intersestd in a server version?
I definitvely am. no X, ssh, http, ftp, postfix, qpopper, samba, squirell, Susefirewall, squid, bind, mysql, phpMyAdmin, mediawiki... installed by default.
I think everybody has different needs with his server, so I would like to see a more slim minimal installation. And then everybody could pick their own server packages.
Perhaps more choices could be available during instalation (or at any later point) where you can choose what kind of machine you want. Now you have KDE, Gnow, Basic and basic with X. Why not add many more options? There could be many more: Perhaps even make the lists available for download from openSUSE.org That way people can just add their own *.sel files and let others use it. Are these file from the CD on suse/setup/descr/ only available during instalation, or can they be used at a later point as well? I can't seem to figure out how I can go from KDE to Gnome or the other way around once I have an already installed sytem, exept by (de-)selecting the indivudual packages myself.
The second think that could be improved is documentation. I like the documentation from SUSE Linux, but there could be more. Maybe some people could add more some server specific documentation to then next SUSE Linux Version.
openSUSE.org is all about documentation, so just start a WiKi and if others are interested, they will add info. houghi -- Quote correct (NL) http://www.briachons.org/art/quote/ Zitiere richtig (DE) http://www.afaik.de/usenet/faq/zitieren Quote correctly (EN) http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 17:05 schrieb jdd:
My orginal itention was to hear if there is somebody else, who want a openSUSE Version which aims at being used as server. Are you intersestd in a server version? I definitvely am. no X, ssh, http, ftp, postfix, qpopper, samba, squirell, Susefirewall, squid, bind, mysql,
Marcel Volz wrote: phpMyAdmin, mediawiki... installed by default.
I think everybody has different needs with his server, so I would like to see a more slim minimal installation. And then everybody could pick their own server packages.
of course, but the key is "installed". on the 9.0 (the last server install I did), nearly all the setup had to be done by hand and not obvious at all.
The second think that could be improved is documentation. I like the documentation from SUSE Linux, but there could be more. Maybe some people could add more some server specific documentation to then next SUSE Linux Version.
I may help. Based on the 9.0, I wrote a hole learning course (alas, for now, it's in french). It's free available here: http://dodin.org/mediawiki/index.php/Formation_Jdd I plan to go to opensuse/SUSE 10.0 when final available and, if needed, I can translate it (for this I would appreciate some help, at least proofreading); It's aimed to very newbie wanting to create his own home server on a dsl line like many can do today jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
Am Montag, 12. September 2005 09:28 schrieb jdd:
Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 17:05 schrieb jdd: I think everybody has different needs with his server, so I would like to see a more slim minimal installation. And then everybody could pick their own server packages.
of course, but the key is "installed". on the 9.0 (the last server install I did), nearly all the setup had to be done by hand and not obvious at all.
What do you mean by hand? Do you want a configuration tool for the server setup ?
The second think that could be improved is documentation. I like the documentation from SUSE Linux, but there could be more. Maybe some people could add more some server specific documentation to then next SUSE Linux Version.
I may help.
I didn't worked with wikis much. I saw you set up some wiki pages at opensuse. Maybe you could start with a start page and first add our ideas to this site. Something like http://www.opensuse.org/End-User_Documentation . I saw there are some articles about servers. But there is no centralised "start page" for them.
Based on the 9.0, I wrote a hole learning course (alas, for now, it's in french). It's free available here:
http://dodin.org/mediawiki/index.php/Formation_Jdd
I plan to go to opensuse/SUSE 10.0 when final available and, if needed, I can translate it (for this I would appreciate some help, at least proofreading);
Sorry but i can't help you translating. My french ist too bad :-(
It's aimed to very newbie wanting to create his own home server on a dsl line like many can do today
Ok, i also do that at home. But that's only one possible option. I've set up some Proxy Server, Firewalls, Webserver and other small server with SUSE Linux that at some customers. For bigger, more important servers (sap, oralce etc.) i always take the enterprise distribution SLES, because of the support. I would like to see some sysadmins to share their experience. -- Marcel Volz
Marcel Volz wrote:
I would like to see some sysadmins to share their experience.
I can only do what I'm good for :-) jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Montag, 12. September 2005 13:01 schrieb jdd:
Marcel Volz wrote:
I would like to see some sysadmins to share their experience. I can only do what I'm good for :-)
Every Linux User is a little sysadmin! :-)
I named my course "Admin Linux Baby", because it's not even at the LPI Junior admin level :-) jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Marcel Volz wrote:
What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution?
Novell does, it's called SLES.
I know that Novell want to earn money with their Server Product, but I think most of the money will be made with additional services and addons, like the Novell Enterprise Services, Groupwise or eDirectory.
Why should Novell "open" SLES ? That doesn't make any sense, as SLES uses packages that are in SUSE Linux and is made of opensource software you can have on SUSE Linux as well. It's just that it comes with a lot of services and guarantees. (it does have some additional modules, e.g. in YaST2, but nevertheless) But feel free to start a new SUSE variant specialized on servers and based on SUSE Linux 10.0, just like Andreas Girardet does with SUPER: http://opensuse.org/SUPER That's what "openSUSE" is really about ;) cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser@skynet.be> <guru@unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDIu+ar3NMWliFcXcRAlzOAJwKx4OZHVwscsUzRYFM9ROJLaVGIACfe0rx yGwxZ889iDDZrlgeDlWncDg= =gX8e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 16:37 schrieb Pascal Bleser:
Marcel Volz wrote:
What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution?
Novell does, it's called SLES.
But it's not OpenSource! I like SLES very much and work with it very often. I would like to see a OpenSource Enterprise Server based on my favourite distribution.
I know that Novell want to earn money with their Server Product, but I think most of the money will be made with additional services and addons, like the Novell Enterprise Services, Groupwise or eDirectory.
Why should Novell "open" SLES ? That doesn't make any sense, as SLES uses packages that are in SUSE Linux and is made of opensource software you can have on SUSE Linux as well. It's just that it comes with a lot of services and guarantees. (it does have some additional modules, e.g. in YaST2, but nevertheless)
I use SUSE Linux as Server at home and sometimes at work, but I don't get the bugfixes and security updates that are needed to implement it at most business. I'm not at Novell and i don't know how much Novell earn with each SLES license, but I don't think that this is much. Maybe much more could be earned if there is a open source version and the additional services would be sold. With the Open Source Version there could be a much more widespread. But that's only my opinion.
But feel free to start a new SUSE variant specialized on servers and based on SUSE Linux 10.0, just like Andreas Girardet does with SUPER: http://opensuse.org/SUPER That's what "openSUSE" is really about ;)
Maybe I think about it. But I don't know if it make sense. For a "Enterprise Distribution" you need a long lifecycle, reliable security update and bugfixes, hardware and software certification and much more. I don't think that a community could do this. -- MfG, Marcel Volz
Hi, On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 16:37 schrieb Pascal Bleser:
Marcel Volz wrote:
What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution?
Novell does, it's called SLES.
But it's not OpenSource! I like SLES very much and work with it very often. I would like to see a OpenSource Enterprise Server based on my favourite distribution.
SLES is always based on SUSE-Linux. SLES9 is deerived from SUSE-9.1. SLES10 will be derived from SUSE-10.x.
I know that Novell want to earn money with their Server Product, but I think most of the money will be made with additional services and addons, like the Novell Enterprise Services, Groupwise or eDirectory.
Why should Novell "open" SLES ? That doesn't make any sense, as SLES uses packages that are in SUSE Linux and is made of opensource software you can have on SUSE Linux as well. It's just that it comes with a lot of services and guarantees. (it does have some additional modules, e.g. in YaST2, but nevertheless)
I use SUSE Linux as Server at home and sometimes at work, but I don't get the bugfixes and security updates that are needed to implement it at most business.
I'm not at Novell and i don't know how much Novell earn with each SLES license, but I don't think that this is much. Maybe much more could be earned if there is a open source version and the additional services would be sold. With the Open Source Version there could be a much more widespread. But that's only my opinion.
How would you define "open source maintenance"? You can download SLES-9 from novell.com for free (and even get a 30-days maintenance), but after evaluation, you have to pay if you want to get further maintenance. And: you would have to pay just for maintenance, nothing more. Totally transparent to me, the maintainers need their payment, and Novell lacks the license to print money.
But feel free to start a new SUSE variant specialized on servers and based on SUSE Linux 10.0, just like Andreas Girardet does with SUPER: http://opensuse.org/SUPER That's what "openSUSE" is really about ;)
Maybe I think about it. But I don't know if it make sense. For a "Enterprise Distribution" you need a long lifecycle, reliable security update and bugfixes, hardware and software certification and much more. I don't think that a community could do this.
The "long lifecycle" is just the point where most competent expert work is needed. This has to get payed, or it will disappear... Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 23:13 schrieb Eberhard Moenkeberg:
Hi,
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Marcel Volz wrote:
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 16:37 schrieb Pascal Bleser:
Marcel Volz wrote:
What about a openSUSE Server Version, just like CentOS or Whitebox ? Perhaps with the same core as SLES? Is there a chance that Novell or openSUSE release such a distribution?
Novell does, it's called SLES.
But it's not OpenSource! I like SLES very much and work with it very often. I would like to see a OpenSource Enterprise Server based on my favourite distribution.
SLES is always based on SUSE-Linux. SLES9 is deerived from SUSE-9.1. SLES10 will be derived from SUSE-10.x.
The point is that i don't get security updates, bugfixes, maybe ServicePacks for SUSE-Linux, but for SLES.
I'm not at Novell and i don't know how much Novell earn with each SLES license, but I don't think that this is much. Maybe much more could be earned if there is a open source version and the additional services would be sold. With the Open Source Version there could be a much more widespread. But that's only my opinion.
How would you define "open source maintenance"? You can download SLES-9 from novell.com for free (and even get a 30-days maintenance), but after evaluation, you have to pay if you want to get further maintenance. And: you would have to pay just for maintenance, nothing more. Totally transparent to me, the maintainers need their payment, and Novell lacks the license to print money.
The listprice for a 2 CPU i386 SLES is about 350 € + yearly maintanence. The price for a Novell Open Enterprise Server 5 User is € 1.120,00 + yearly maintance. I think if there are more SLES (maybe for free) there will be much more people/business which are intererested in and will buy OpenEnterprise Servers and additional services. So Novell could pay the mantainers (and everybody is happy?!).
But feel free to start a new SUSE variant specialized on servers and based on SUSE Linux 10.0, just like Andreas Girardet does with SUPER: http://opensuse.org/SUPER That's what "openSUSE" is really about ;)
Maybe I think about it. But I don't know if it make sense. For a "Enterprise Distribution" you need a long lifecycle, reliable security update and bugfixes, hardware and software certification and much more. I don't think that a community could do this.
The "long lifecycle" is just the point where most competent expert work is needed. This has to get payed, or it will disappear...
I agree with you. Even the Debian Project with many hundreds of developers (with many high skilled) has some problems with their security updates. I think that making patches for software that is many years old is not very much fun :-) But if we could have the srpms from SLES we could recompile them, use them for a openSUSE Server, similar to CentOS. That would much less work. All we need then is a infrastructure for this and some people who mantain this. At the CentOS Website there are 10 named people which form the CentOS team. (But I think there are more behind.) -- Marcel Volz
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 11:04:53AM +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
But if we could have the srpms from SLES we could recompile them, use them for a openSUSE Server,
Just for the record: the SLES 9 eval version available at http://download.novell.com/ contains the full set of 6 CDs, two of which contain the src rpms. To say SLES is not open source is a bit far-fetched - but it is aimed at earning money with it, that's true. What you pay for in SLES is exactly what you propose: additional testing and bugfixing and several years of maintenance. If you can find a group of people who can offer you this level of maintenance, who can guarantee you that they won't disappear when they find greener pastures, and are willing to do this on a volunteer, unpaid basis, just do it. And if you find them on this list, start a sub-project as has already been proposed.
All we need then is a infrastructure for this and some people who mantain this.
Piece of cake ;-) Sonja -- Sonja Krause-Harder (skh@suse.de) Research & Development SUSE Linux Products GmbH
Am Sonntag, 11. September 2005 17:42 schrieb Sonja Krause-Harder:
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 11:04:53AM +0200, Marcel Volz wrote:
But if we could have the srpms from SLES we could recompile them, use them for a openSUSE Server,
Just for the record: the SLES 9 eval version available at http://download.novell.com/ contains the full set of 6 CDs, two of which contain the src rpms. To say SLES is not open source is a bit far-fetched - but it is aimed at earning money with it, that's true.
I don't say that SLES is not open source! I've already downloaded the evaluation CDs. I think i know sles well. I've worked with it since SLES7. Are there srpms for the updates, too?
What you pay for in SLES is exactly what you propose: additional testing and bugfixing and several years of maintenance. If you can find a group of people who can offer you this level of maintenance, who can guarantee you that they won't disappear when they find greener pastures, and are willing to do this on a volunteer, unpaid basis, just do it. And if you find them on this list, start a sub-project as has already been proposed.
That's the point. As i've already written, i don't think that's possible for a group of volunteers. Even Debian, one of the biggest linux distribution has problems with it. As i've also already written, I think if there are more SLES there will be much more people/business which are intererested in and will buy additional services from Novell. And there is more benefit for Novell. But that's only my opinion. I don't want to criticise Novell. I think Suse has done a good job at their Enterprise Distribution. That's one point why i use it. Please go on with your good work! -- Marcel Volz
Just for the record: the SLES 9 eval version available at http://download.novell.com/ contains the full set of 6 CDs, two of which contain the src rpms. To say SLES is not open source is a bit far-fetched - but it is aimed at earning money with it, that's true.
I don't say that SLES is not open source! I've already downloaded the evaluation CDs. I think i know sles well. I've worked with it since SLES7. Are there srpms for the updates, too?
If you are a paying maintenance customer, yes.
What you pay for in SLES is exactly what you propose: additional testing and bugfixing and several years of maintenance. If you can find a group of people who can offer you this level of maintenance, who can guarantee you that they won't disappear when they find greener pastures, and are willing to do this on a volunteer, unpaid basis, just do it. And if you find them on this list, start a sub-project as has already been proposed.
That's the point. As i've already written, i don't think that's possible for a group of volunteers. Even Debian, one of the biggest linux distribution has problems with it.
As i've also already written, I think if there are more SLES there will be much more people/business which are intererested in and will buy additional services from Novell. And there is more benefit for Novell. But that's only my opinion.
I don't want to criticise Novell. I think Suse has done a good job at their Enterprise Distribution. That's one point why i use it. Please go on with your good work!
Paying for the quality of SLES and its maintenance is part of Novells business model. As one of the guys almost exclusively working on this (for the security updates part) I (and several dozen other people working in engineering and support) really would like to continue to get paid and I definitely think you get enough value for your money. Ciao, Marcus
Am Montag, 12. September 2005 07:52 schrieb Marcus Meissner:
If you are a paying maintenance customer, yes.
My company i work for, is maintenance customer and also many of our customers are SUSE/Novell customers. Once we were also Suse Partner and now we are thinking about being a Novell Partner.
I don't want to criticise Novell. I think Suse has done a good job at their Enterprise Distribution. That's one point why i use it. Please go on with your good work!
Paying for the quality of SLES and its maintenance is part of Novells business model.
As one of the guys almost exclusively working on this (for the security updates part) I (and several dozen other people working in engineering and support) really would like to continue to get paid and I definitely think you get enough value for your money.
Please read carefully what i've written!!! 1. I like SLES! 2. I like SUSE! 3. You don't understand my idea! -> more SLES -> more Service Contracts / more OES -> more money! I don't think that the SLES maintenance is expensive. Microsoft or even RedHat is much more expensive. You get reliable updates and bugfixes. I know your work well. I'm also subscribed to suse-security and to the maintenance mails from sles. You're doing a good job! You don't need to defend your work! -- Marcel Volz
Sonja Krause-Harder wrote:
Just for the record: the SLES 9 eval version available at http://download.novell.com/ contains the full set of 6 CDs, two of which contain the src rpms. To say SLES is not open source is a bit far-fetched - but it is aimed at earning money with it, that's true.
I wish the SLES 9 eval version can payed (licenced) for one user, home use or students for little money. Ciao Marco.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Marco Maske wrote:
Sonja Krause-Harder wrote:
Just for the record: the SLES 9 eval version available at http://download.novell.com/ contains the full set of 6 CDs, two of which contain the src rpms. To say SLES is not open source is a bit far-fetched - but it is aimed at earning money with it, that's true.
I wish the SLES 9 eval version can payed (licenced) for one user, home use or students for little money.
Check out: http://www.suse.de/edu/ Regards Christoph
Christoph Thiel wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Marco Maske wrote:
I wish the SLES 9 eval version can payed (licenced) for one user, home use or students for little money.
Check out: http://www.suse.de/edu/
Great :-) Thank you very much. Bevor, I only know that for the desktop version. -- Ciao Marco, registered GNU/Linux-User 313353
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:47:10AM +0200, Marco Maske wrote:
I wish the SLES 9 eval version can payed (licenced) for one user, home use or students for little money.
I don't think that for these uses (one user, home use, students) you are really needing the added value of SLES over SUSE Linux. Rasmus
Rasmus Plewe wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:47:10AM +0200, Marco Maske wrote:
I wish the SLES 9 eval version can payed (licenced) for one user, home use or students for little money.
I don't think that for these uses (one user, home use, students) you are really needing the added value of SLES over SUSE Linux.
That's not the question if I need it. I wan't to learn to use it. The other thing is that the last SuSE for my RISC-mashine is SuSE Linux 7.3. (O.K. Now OpenSUSE is able to running on an RS/6000 and I'm very happy about :-) The SLES is aviable for more processor platforms than SuSE Linux. Ciao Marco.
Marco Maske wrote:
That's not the question if I need it. I wan't to learn to use it.
you know, the main question is documentation. with a good doc, config utilities are almost unusefull. But there are too many difference (in the details) is different distros to have an universal good doc. doc must be very near of the release. the suse doc is one of the best one ever, but still too small (linux is hudge :-). The opensuse site can have a great use is this direction. jdd -- pour m'écrire, aller sur: http://www.dodin.net http://valerie.dodin.net http://arvamip.free.fr
jdd wrote:
Marco Maske wrote:
That's not the question if I need it. I wan't to learn to use it.
you know, the main question is documentation.
That's one reason why I use SuSE. I'm german and there are many books about SuSE and from SuSE Press itself (now millin) here in german and in my house, too. But now I read that the SLES 9 for ppc is for 64bit only. And I have a 32bit ppc :-( I think the main question for _me_ is an OS able to running on my hardware without compiling myself. But I think we come off topic here and Christoph has the answer given for me. Ciao Marco.
participants (13)
-
Anders Johansson -
Christoph Thiel -
Eberhard Moenkeberg -
houghi -
jdd -
Joseph Smith -
Marcel Volz -
Marco Maske -
Marcus Meissner -
Pascal Bleser -
Rasmus Plewe -
Richard Bos -
Sonja Krause-Harder