RHEL clones
Chuck Wolber wrote:
darn thing we can do about it. Well, there *IS* one thing we can do.
We've
considered purchasing one copy of RHEL 3.0, stripping all of the non-GPL
You don't need to buy it. Get the sources from redhat ftp server.
But it is easier to rebuild a RHEL clone from itself.
stuff out of it, purposely never using the support option, and
calling it
Quantum Linux. Is that wrong? Legally, no. We've been studying the GPL
If you delete *all* Red Hat references, logos, ... from all packages
and rebuild _all_ from sources then it's ok.
cAos[1] and rhel-rebuild[2] are doing the same.
and the RH licensing agreement closely and they support such an
action. Is
it moral? I believe it is. We're happy to pay RH a chunk of change once a
year as our "contribution" towards all of the QA you speak of. NPR works
the same way, with a great deal of success.
You will need to rebuild every update from sources and then release it
to your customers. Otherswise is a license violation.
[1] http://caosity.org/
[2] http://www2.uibk.ac.at/zid/software/unix/linux/
--
HTML mails are going to trash automagically