Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] content removed from site

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Re: [Fedora-ia64-list] content removed from site

Maybe I should have followed these signals earlier, my response is really slow ... but I didn't have clear picture about how the whole thing works among involved vendors and their interests, and I simply couldn't devote my time enough for this even if I knew. So, almost a year later Red Hat decided to abandon Itanium and Xen (will it change much after Tukwila ?) ... when you say Debian, you mean Suse, and it hasn't got Xen on IA64 yet - maybe it will have it in the future ? HP is not just more Debian-centric, it develops low sensitivity towards linux and open source in general. Recent advance about HP's BladeSystem (Matrix) SIM s/w infrastructure includes support for Hyper-V, VMWare and XenServer virtualization platforms - KVM or Xen not even announced, but OS support remains (RHEL, Suse). On the other hand, I am interested in SAP (also supports RHEL and Suse, and Xen, too) and Oracle roadmaps which still welcome Linux and open source as critical business models. For me it is not option to leave Itanium at the moment, and I would like to see what is the future of Xen and Linux commercial distros on it in future. Here is what I have at the moment, more will follow on soon:


2009/4/17 John L. Bass <[hidden email]>
I agree Redhat managment are being idiots here, after all this is
supposed to be the debugging ground for IA64 RedHat. The next problem
behind this one, is that this Cowboy distro is not a Fedora sanctioned
port/distribution either, and somebody is going to ask that all the
Fedora trademarked references be removed from the cowboy distribution.

At that point, why bother at all. I plan to support Ubuntu starting this
summer when I have some more time. With HP being increasingly Debian
based over RedHat, and growing around  the Ubuntu market, that seems to
be the new distro of choice.

Intel certainly isn't footing the bill for IA64 Fedora, so it seems a
lost cause at this point.

other ideas, insights, comments, or suggestions welcome.

Have fun,

Dave Bowman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Luck, Tony <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>     Presumably it was the "hat" part that they objected too?  So
>     choose something
>     that is as far from a hat as possible, but still cowboy themed:
>     "cowboyboot Linux"?
>     Only similarity with "redhat" is that both end in the letter "t"
>     ... the world will officially
>     be crazy if the lawyers deem that to be infringing :-)
> I agree, but as an individual I don't have a good way to defend myself
> against Red Hat and their team of lawyers.
>     How does version control in Fedora work?  If you heard a rumor
>     that fedora was building,
>     installing and booting on x86 on some particular day: could you
>     find out what versions
>     of each package they used and replicate the setup? Or is it just a
>     crapshoot and you
>     get the latest of everything, so you take your chances that it
>     wasn't broken between
>     it working on x86 and you starting your build?
> In theory this would be possible but very difficult.  Individual
> packages are versioned so if you knew what version of anaconda worked
> you could try that.  I honestly don't have the time to put quite that
> much effort into this.
> On another note.... you work for Intel right?  I had hear that Intel
> had been looking into hosting the koji server so we could have a
> _real_ Fedora ia64 again.  Do you know anything about that?
> Dave
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> Fedora-ia64-list mailing list
> [hidden email]

Fedora-ia64-list mailing list
[hidden email]

Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
[hidden email]