On 12/29/2011 01:19 PM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 12/29/2011 01:01 PM, John Broome wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 13:57, John R Pierce <pierce@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> On 12/29/11 4:30 AM, mcclnx mcc wrote: >>>>> Does anyone know CENTOS/Redhat 6.X compatible to ORACLE software (X86 >>>>> and X86_64) version like 9.X, 10GR2, 11G and 11GR2. >>>> >>>> 11.2.0.3(I think is latest?) seems to work fine on CentOS 6.1, however >>>> RHEL6 (and all versions of CentOS) are completely unsupported by >>>> Oracle, so I wouldn't plan on using it for any sort of production >>>> where you expect support. there were some minor ignorable issues in >>>> install, like it claimed the system is missing some old packages >>> >>> So if oracle isn't certified to run on OEL 6, did oracle roll it out >>> just for shits and giggles? >> >> No, they rolled it out as a Linux distribution. Believe it or not, >> people do other things besides run Oracle databases on Linux :) >> >> I am sure they will certify their database systems on OEL 6.x in the >> future. >> >> They can't very well (at least not with a straight face) tell Red Hat >> that RHEL6 is not certified while saying that OEL6 is certified can >> they? If they do that for very long, they will be breaching their >> support agreements. > <snip> > Let me also note that whatever else Oracle is, they're not stupid when it > comes to selling, and there are many, many more RHEL installations than > there are OUL. > But if you have a license for rhel6, you can also run rhel5 ... therefore, they get their supported sales by supporting rhel5, while still claiming their kernel is better and trying to drive people to their product. Where is their incentive to support rhel6 until much closer to March 31, 2017 (rhel5 EOL Date).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
