Re: Oracle chief architect says there ought to be one Linux distribution: Red Hat
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 22:49:37 +0200
· Ramon F Herrera <ramon_at_conexus.net>:
> On May 8, 6:22 am, Michael Schmarck <usenet-mich..._at_schmarck.cn>
>> Rainer Duffner <rai..._at_ultra-secure.de> wrote: >> > Michael Schmarck schrieb: >> >> >> Because Linux is different? How many Windows, HP-UX, AIX >> >> distributions are out there? >> >> > Cute to leave out "Solaris" in the above list ;-) >> >> Yes, wasn't it? :) >> >> But even with Solaris it makes sense that Oracle only supports Solaris. >> After all, only Solaris 10 (or 11, when it comes out) is the /official/ >> Solaris. >> >> That's still not comparable to Linux - RHEL is certainly not the only >> official Linux there is. >> >> Michael
>> That's still not comparable to Linux - RHEL is certainly not the only >> official Linux there is.
> You are obviously a Linux desktop user and have no idea about
> corporate servers.
> Oracle never said that RedHat is the only "official Linux". Oracle
> only runs on "Enterprise Linux" -a category very different from
All right. So? There are also other Enterprise Linux versions out there - eg. SLES. And as far as stability is concerned, even Debian could be well suited. Or Ubuntu LTS, which is guaranteed to be supported (and thus stable) for 3 years.
> What Oracle wants to say is:
> (1) Oracle is in the server business
> (2) Oracle db only runs on "Enterprise Linux"
> (3) Our official enterprise Linux is RedHat
> The mistake many of you (I have really clarified this more often
> that I can count)
I have never heard of you.
> are making is trying to be at level (3) when
> you don't even reach level (1).
Whatever you mean.
-- A snake lurks in the grass. -- Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil)Received on Thu May 08 2008 - 15:49:37 CDT