Re: We want Oracle for Linux !!!

In article <5cqegq$igs_at_jupiter.planet.net>, Jared Hecker <jared_at_saturn.planet.net> writes
>What Oracle _could_ do rather cheaply, if they wanted to, is:

It might be cheap but it is doesn't provide any income either.

>
>1. Pick a distribution (Red Hat would be a good choice);
>
>2. Get the server working (and SQL*Net!)
>
>3. Post a white paper how-to on Btheir WWW site with caveats that this is
>not and will never be a supported configuration, and decline to sell a
>maintenance contract (i.e., tech support) to anyone setting up such a
>configuration.
>
>4. Alternatively, support a WorkGroup Server version - after all, Linux
>is a much easier server to support than, say, OS/2 - and any shop radical
>enough to run Oracle on an OS/2 Server is certainly a potential Linux
>prospect! It would certainly be what the marketing types call
>'push-pull' demand.
>
>There is a precedent: Sybase ported Net-Lib and CT-Lib (and presumably,
>DB-Lib) to Linux at least two years ago, with said 'no support!' tenets.
>
>Perhaps if we all e-mail Larry Ellison...
>
>Regards,
>jh
 

-- 
Jim Smith