Oracle needs to be careful. APIs can be copyrighted now, you know.
Never one to be outdone by rival Red Hat, Oracle has unveiled its own distribution of the OpenStack cloud control freak on the same day that Shadowman opened its latest beta distribution to the public. Oracle's OpenStack distro is currently classified as a technology preview, and it installs over the latest version of Oracle …
Are there any articles or websites that explain the differences between, for example, Oracle's Unbreakable Linux and RHEL's Linux core? Why do some people swear by Debian Stable and others always use Open Suse? Are the differences too complicated to understand and for me to make logical decisions based on them?
Are there any articles or websites that explain the differences between, for example, Oracle's Unbreakable Linux and RHEL's Linux core?
There are essentially no differences.
RH releases its code under the appropriate licences and supplies source for the entire distribution. The GPL allows anyone else to come along and rebuild that source, and redistribute it.
There are a couple of bits you can't reditribute - namely, those packages that identify the distro as a Red Hat product. It's a few styrings and a couple of logos, really. There are replacements readily available, and Red Hat even publish a guide on how to identify the bits you need to replace.
And so that's what Oracle did - Oracle Linux is just Red Hat Enterprise Linux with the identifying marks (legitimately) removed. And then they decided to add in a leading-edge kernel version (which Enterprise distributions don't usually do) as an option.
And that's it.
"The two are so alike that Oracle says you could apply Oracle Linux patches to an equivalent RHEL server with no problems."
And vice versa, which means they are the same product. (minus the commercial bits on either side)
In fact Oracle confirms what everybody was suspecting: There's no bloody difference between RHEL and the clone Oracle Unbreakable Linux, except for branding and pricing/support.
If you define a copycat as some sort of effort to make a product look and behave the same way as the original, then Oracle's "effort" is worse than a copycat, as in: there wasn't even an effort. It's the exact same thing under the hood.
Everybody is free to clone/fork open source. But c'mon... at least add some value!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021