Jump to content

Talk:Oracle Linux

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TinucherianBot (talk | contribs) at 11:04, 26 September 2008 (Autoassessment for WP:COMP : ( FAQ ) : (Plugin++) class=Stub, auto=yes.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing: Software Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

"Oracle Unbreakable Linux" is a support program. Oracle's true distribution name is "Oracle Enterprise Linux". I hope it will change into true name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.211.19.86 (talkcontribs) 00:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC-7)

Opinion

This article sounds like an 'opinion' piece, taking personal shots at Oracle. Thoughts? --Felipe1982 20:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC) The comments around centos are unfounded. every rpm comes straight from red hat as you can see on the distributed source code. The patches that were previously done by centos which also ended up in the Oracle version are actually documented in the changelogs of the rpms, so credit is provided in the normal mechanism. I would agree that this is a heavily opinionated article.[reply]

I would concur. There is more written in the controversy section than the rest of the entire article. --hseritt 19:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]