>
> On Fri, 24 Dec 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Benno Senoner wrote:
> >
>
> > > This would save a LOT of headaches for many people.
> >
> > While this is still a "redhat" OS it is not a redhat distribution.
> > What is RedHats position on this sort of thing.
> > Can this be distributed or would there be legal problems?
> > I could make an updated iso available. If not I suppose I
> > could simply create a RedHat iso with the updates supplied
> > by redhat. Then I would need somewhere to use as a ftp
> > as the demand would be greater than my humble connection
> > could cope with
> > creating your iso is also simple and there is a HOW-TO or
> > mini HOW-TO somewhere. All you need is a cd-r and
> > some HDD space.
>
> Redhat itself should provide this updated ISO image,
>
> and would save them headaches too, since a user which downloads the RH 6.1 ISO
> image now (assume that it would be updated with the latest fixes) will not
> complain about 2-3 months old security flaws.
>
> It should be Redhat's responsibility to provide the up-to-date distribution in
> ISO format, in order to mantain linux's reutation as a "secure operating
> system".
>
> So agian my wishes for Redhat are:
>
> -provide an updated ISO every week or so
> - or provide a "giant-fix" with the latest update.
>
>
> Any official response from the Redhat people ?
> Is there any reason why this has not been implemented ?
>
> Benno.
>
>
I am not a RedHat employee so I think I can speak freely here and I
will translate a french expression: You want the butter, the money of
the butter and in addition the woman selling it
You ask RedHat to spend resources (ie $$$) in provinding for free a
far better product than the boxed version. This is _far_ more than
what is demanded by GPL.
--
Jean Francois Martinez
Project Independence: Linux for the Masses
http://www.independence.seul.org
--
To unsubscribe:
mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
