Oracle messes with CentOS

Although the name of Oracle sounds like an enemy of free software, there is indeed a distribution called Oracle Linux. It is a clone distribution of Red Hat Enterprise Linux that has 2 kernels, one 100% compatible with Red Hat and another called "Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel" which is customized by Oracle and offers better scalability and performance compared to kernel 2.6.32 that RHEL uses. Oracle Linux is free (you have to register to download it), and if you have 400 euros you can afford a year of technical support from Oracle.

Now where is the attack? The Oracle did a little page where it is tried to persuade users of CentOS a switch to Oracle Linux. They actually made a script what it does is that the updates come from the Oracle repositories.

But the icing on the cake is a chart on that page suggesting that Red Hat security updates arrive earlier to Oracle Linux than CentOS. The graph is from last year when CentOS had problems keeping up with Red Hat, both due to internal problems and also because Red Hat decided to change its way of publishing its source code, making it difficult for clones to recompile (especially Oracle Linux, but inevitably to CentOS), and that's when they took advantage of both Oracle Linux and Scientific Linux (another RHEL clone that is starting to make people talk). However the graph does not show the analysis of what is going on in 2012, and it is the blog bashton who goes out to antagonize Oracle by showing that so far this year, Red Hat's security updates arrive earlier to CentOS than Oracle.

So, paraphrasing MetalByte, «In case it was not enough for Oracle the ridiculous that you have done in your case against Google, obliged by the judge to pay the legal costs of your opponent for heavy, now they start attacking CentOS with Bad guy fud, that is, the one who fights from the front line without trying too hard.

Sources:

http://linux.oracle.com/switch/centos/

http://www.bashton.com/blog/2012/oracle-spreading-fud-about-centos/

http://www.muylinux.com/2012/07/18/oracle-ataca-a-centos-con-falsos-argumentos/


6 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

*

*

  1. Responsible for the data: Miguel Ángel Gatón
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   dwarf said

    Oracle doesn't know who to mess with xD

  2.   Carlos Carcamo said

    Oracle should be smarter, what it does speaks ill of a world-class company than a shame, and even more than a mess with a free distribution like CentOs leaves much to be desired by Oracle ...

  3.   proper said

    Oracle should stick with its Database (which by the way is its flagship product) and stop screwing around with others.

    Let's put things on a scale:

    On the one hand CentOS is a product of a community, this means that the same thing as last year can happen (internal problems) leaving several SysAdmins on edge (I remember a 0-day of apache that lasted 3 weeks without the CentOS release the patch). Nobody assures that it will not happen again.

    On the other hand, Oracle is a company famous for killing open projects like OpenSolaris or OpenOffice (which didn't actually kill it literally like the other one, but they did screw up the project) so if they offer Oracle Linux, no one ensures that tomorrow they will remove their version "Free" and leave only the payment.

    Comparing them, I prefer CentOS, which today is doing things well and is on par with RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux).

    On the other hand there is SL (Scientific Linux), which is developed by CERN and Fermilab, and is the distro used by the famous hadron collider.

    I see this distro like this:
    - It is maintained by salaried physicists and engineers.
    - Their patches were published between 24 and 48 hours after those of RHEL in the CentOS crisis period so at that time many were switched to SL.
    - They modify some packages and add others depending on their needs.
    - They mix updates. They are currently at version 6.2 but apply RHEL 6.3 patches to their current version. This is obviously not bad, it simply means that they do not have the need to release version 6.3 of SL and there is the "but" and that is that it is a distro focused on those of CERN, who use it internally and not for the rest of the mortals. But that's not bad either, I'm just looking for something negative in the distro.

    In short, all these RHEL clones have their "something" and it will depend on each one which one chooses.

    1.    Phytoschido said

      This.

      Well, the more money companies have, the more ambitious they become. I just hope they are corrected in time and do not end up as SCO - although they would be well deserved.

  4.   kondur05 said

    as I wrote in very linux: is there oracle linux ?, besides the sacasm, what is oracle for? I say if they are falling to sticks as they say here with a community service that will be in front of their real competition? I think in oracle administration it's time for some heads to roll!

  5.   Fernando Cassia said

    "I hate Larry" and "I hate Oracel" are not valid technical arguments.

    FC