Le mardi 19 avril 2005 à 19:59 +0200, Arjan van de Ven a écrit :
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 19:34 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le lundi 18 avril 2005 à 22:18 +1000, Russell Coker a écrit :
> > On Friday 01 April 2005 05:56, Roland Käser <roli(a)israel-jugendtag.ch>
> > > >I don't see any particular benefit offered by running a 2.4
> > >
> > > a 2.6 Xen host.
> > > Have You ever tried to install a Oracle 9 on "modern" fedora
> > > can sing some songs about this crap. (The oracle not the Fedora).
> > Why would you want to run Oracle on Fedora? RHEL costs much less than Oracle
> > and will make things much easier for you.
> > You might ask whether a RHEL3 update for Xen will be released (RHEL3 was 2.4
> > based while RHEL4 is 2.6 based). But it's not a question for this list.
> If you are a dev shop building apps on top of Oracle (apps that will
> then be sold to wealthy corporations that will shell $$$$ for Oracle
> licenses) Oracle will let you install as many Oracle setups as you like
> (they realise this helps selling their products)
> If you want to host these free developer instances on RHEL Red Hat will
> enforce through up2date a full license per dev/test system.
which is why you join the RH developers program.... ;)
please take rhel rants to a rhel mailinglist.
I'm only reporting what RH people told me about a year ago (you shall
shell out a license per system you use to help RH sell its stuff). If RH
has come to its senses since so much for the better. But last time I
looked you had lots of reasons to try to run Oracle on something other