indemnification. Large companies that purchase RHEL/SuSE, etc. It's
above. Most of the large Enterprise RHEL/SUSE contracts come down to
critical vulnerability is rampant within the business. Open source as
for a legal battle. They also have no *real* responsibility to fix
Run it on all of my personal business servers. Although, my job at the
"status" they have achieved in the Enterprise environment. It all
> Send freebsd-advocacy mailing list submissions to
>
freebsd-advocacy@...
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>
freebsd-advocacy-request@...
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>
freebsd-advocacy-owner@...
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of freebsd-advocacy digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ? (Chris Rees)
> 2. Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ? (Charlie Kester)
> 3. Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ? (Allen)
> 4. Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ? (Michael Vince)
> 5. Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ? (Ivan Voras)
> 6. Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ? (Tony Theodore)
> 7. Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ? (Saifi Khan)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:25:50 +0100
> From: Chris Rees <
utisoft@...>
> Subject: Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ?
> To: Saifi Khan <
saifi.khan@...>
> Cc:
freebsd-advocacy@..., "Julian H. Stacey"
> <
jhs@...>,
freebsd-questions@...
> Message-ID:
> <
b79ecaef0909271225r438c4205u1389cfeafe90a051@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2009/9/25 Saifi Khan <
saifi.khan@...>:
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
>>
>>> > > > i noticed that there is no Oracle available for FreeBSD
>>> > > >
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/index.html>>> > > >
>>> > > > What could be the reason for that ?
>>> > >
>>> > > Best ask direct of commercial application vendor Oracle.
>>> > > IE wave money under Oracle's nose & ask to purchase what you want.
>>> > >
>>> > > If Oracle think there's enough profit in it, there's many BSD
>>> > > consultants eg
http://berklix.com/consultants/ willing to work.
>>> > >
>>> > > Cheers,
>>> > > Julian
>>> > > --
>>> >
>>> > i was wondering if there is any technical reason behind this ?
>>>
>>> Most unlikely. Ask Oracle & tell advocacy@ what you find out.
>>> I'd bet perceived market share & demand as ever, ie Money.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Julian:
>>
>> Here is the response on the Oracle forum thread to my posting,
>>
>>
>> """
>> FreeBSD is a kernel not used in any extant operating system with
>> the sole exception being Apple's Mac OSX so you are heading,
>> full speed ahead, toward disappointment.
>
> And this is where he gives away that he knows nothing about it. In the
> first sentence, he shows that he thinks that Mac OS X uses the FreeBSD
> kernel. (Which is wrong, in case you were wondering
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system) )
>
>> FreeBSD handles many
>> things very differently from the UNIX System 5 standard so you
>> can not just kludge your way into this.
>
> What?
>
>>
>> What fascinates me about your request is why you care. FreeBSD
>> is going nowhere at a staggeringly fast pace. And to the same
>> place as went Oracle Database version 8.0. Obscurity.
>
> What?
>
>>
>> Install Oracle's Enterprise Linux and you will have a real
>> operating system in less time than you've spent monitoring this
>> thead. And as an additional value it will support the Oracle
>> technology stack while you are still young enough to use it.
>> """
>>
>> and
>> """
>> IF you can match up the system calls, then you can 'make it
>> work'.
>> """
>>
>> The relevant links are
>> 1.
http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=952076&tstart=0>> 2.
http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=952076&tstart=0>>
>> The response seems to suggest that there is some feature used by
>> Oracle which is expected from a UNIX Sys 5 std and perhaps
>> FreeBSD does not support/have the syscall.
>>
>> Given the response, What is your analysis of the situation ?
>>
>>
>> thanks
>> Saifi.
>>
>
>
> This guy replying to your post was a troll, basically. Ignore him, and
> concentrate on real Oracle employees for sources. Of course, if this
> was an Oracle employee, then you really should think about using some
> different software....
>
> Chris
>
> --
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 14:09:35 -0700
> From: Charlie Kester <
corky1951@...>
> Subject: Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ?
> To:
freebsd-questions@...,
freebsd-advocacy@...
> Message-ID: <
20090927210934.GA85077@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> On Sun 27 Sep 2009 at 12:25:50 PDT Chris Rees wrote:
>>This guy replying to your post was a troll, basically. Ignore him, and
>
> Yep. It shows that some Linux fans are just as prone to creating FUD as
> their adversaries in the Windows world.
>
> I'd like to think the BSD community is better than that.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 18:11:15 -0400
> From: Allen <
GedankeZauberer@...>
> Subject: Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ?
> To:
freebsd-advocacy@...
> Message-ID: <
4ABFE303.8050104@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Charlie Kester wrote:
>> On Sun 27 Sep 2009 at 12:25:50 PDT Chris Rees wrote:
>>> This guy replying to your post was a troll, basically. Ignore him, and
>>
>> Yep. It shows that some Linux fans are just as prone to creating FUD as
>> their adversaries in the Windows world.
>>
>> I'd like to think the BSD community is better than that.
>
> I use Linux, I don't do this kind of thing because I use both. I have a
> machine with FreeBSD on it dual booting Windows 98 SE (So I can play
> Magic: The Gathering; Spells of the Ancients, and some other stuff) and
> then I have a Debian box, and another Debian machine dual booting with
> Windows XP, and my Laptop dual boots Slackware 13.0 and Windows XP, and
> then on my Wife's Laptop is Windows XP, and OpenSUSE. My FTP server PC
> runs Slackware 12.2. I use both Linux and BSD because I like both, and
> anyone who says Linux is better is sadly mistaken, they both are great :)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:37:24 +1000
> From: Michael Vince <
mv@...>
> Subject: Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ?
> To: Saifi Khan <
saifi.khan@...>
> Cc:
freebsd-advocacy@..., "Julian H. Stacey"
> <
jhs@...>,
freebsd-questions@...
> Message-ID: <
4AC02164.7040201@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 25/09/2009 10:28 PM, Saifi Khan wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>> i noticed that there is no Oracle available for FreeBSD
>>>>>>
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/index.html>>>>>>
>>>>>> What could be the reason for that ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Best ask direct of commercial application vendor Oracle.
>>>>> IE wave money under Oracle's nose& ask to purchase what you want.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Oracle think there's enough profit in it, there's many BSD
>>>>> consultants eg
http://berklix.com/consultants/ willing to work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Julian
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>> i was wondering if there is any technical reason behind this ?
>>>>
>>> Most unlikely. Ask Oracle& tell advocacy@ what you find out.
>>> I'd bet perceived market share& demand as ever, ie Money.
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Julian:
>>
>> Here is the response on the Oracle forum thread to my posting,
>>
>>
>> """
>> FreeBSD is a kernel not used in any extant operating system with
>> the sole exception being Apple's Mac OSX so you are heading,
>>
> The reality is that Oracle is meant to be a very expensive solution for
> companies that don't know what to do. This makes Red Hat etc an ideal
> contender for this situation as it promises full enterprise support.
> Whether it is the truth or if its even a good solution is completely
> irreverent to these 2 tech companies because at the end of the day they
> are just trying to make money and please the stock holders.
>
> We have bought the occasional Dell server with Enterprise Red Hat and
> found all sorts of weird little problems. My preferred story was the
> Perl that RHE came with was bleeding edge (for the time of release)
> which at first looked nice. But when I discovered my FreeBSD laptop
> could parse a 500meg log file 4 times faster then the quad core RHE Dell
> server I know something was wrong. It was just the version Perl that RHE
> decided to package up the distribution with. I ended up having to build
> a later version into /usr/local and everything was fine. But is this
> really a good solution? Was this worthy of the word enterprise?
> absolutely not, I mean its not a big deal to build a second Perl into
> /usr/local on RHE but FreeBSD ports seems like a far cleaner and
> professional solution if you ask me, just because its not point and
> click friendly shouldn't be some kind of excuse, to me its and clean and
> pure as I could dream.
>
> We hired a person directly from Oracle full time to build a new database
> project on Oracle. After it was all built and been using it for about 2
> years I just thought it was a bit of a disgrace. Oracle is brittle,
> unreliable and expensive. We had FreeBSD+MySQL along side it the whole
> time and it was just so much more reliable and faster for the same
> amount of hardware.
> Oracle by packaged design is meant to encourage a comparatively massive
> amount of hardware investment compared to what could be achieved with
> MySQL and FreeBSD. I think it is just as much about masking its crap
> performance then any other argument.
>
> I think Oracle is a about of system of making money out of false
> beliefs, it takes full advantage of corporate companies conservative
> beliefs and is probably only the reasonable solution for at best 5% of
> the companies it lives at, its all a matter of opinion which would be
> argued more from how much money a set of individuals are making out of
> it over a better technical solution.
> Some how Oracle want people to believe that a few 100's thousand dollars
> for their software is vastly superior to any other DB in the world is
> just nonsense.
> There is not any other mass scale pieces of software that most company's
> need where there is some how a magically vastly superior solution. There
> is no single/few license $100,000 operating system, no single/few
> license $100,000 excel, no single/few license $100,000 web server.
>
> I guess what I am saying at the end of this is that if you can avoid
> Oracle that is great, I fully recommend you do.
>
> Just because you can buy MySQL Enterprise Server far more cheaply and
> install/deploy it far more easily on more different platforms isn't
> something to be suspicious about, its just a better software solution
> and I recommend you take full advantage of it while you still can.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 10:49:36 +0200
> From: Ivan Voras <
ivoras@...>
> Subject: Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ?
> To:
freebsd-advocacy@...
> Message-ID: <
h9ptb8$oi0$1@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Saifi Khan wrote:
>> Hi all:
>>
>> In continuation of my investigation of Oracle, i also noticed
>> that there is:
>> . no SAP for FreeBSD
>> . no DB2 for FreeBSD
>> . no Sybase ASE for FreeBSD
>> . no Informix for FreeBSD
>>
>> Discouing PostgreSql installations, effectively enterprise
>> database setups have given FreeBSD a miss.
>> What could be reason for this ?
>
> An obvious guess would be that the userbase is too small and that makes
> it unprofitable to support the products on FreeBSD.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 259 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-advocacy/attachments/20090928/986fcfbf/signature-0001.pgp>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:20:23 +1000
> From: Tony Theodore <
tonyt@...>
> Subject: Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ?
> To: Ivan Voras <
ivoras@...>
> Cc:
freebsd-advocacy@...
> Message-ID:
> <
22166b750909280320r3356c113l8d54e46279f2742f@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2009/9/28 Ivan Voras <
ivoras@...>
>
>> Saifi Khan wrote:
>> > Hi all:
>> >
>> > In continuation of my investigation of Oracle, i also noticed
>> > that there is:
>> > . no SAP for FreeBSD
>> > . no DB2 for FreeBSD
>> > . no Sybase ASE for FreeBSD
>> > . no Informix for FreeBSD
>> >
>> > Discouing PostgreSql installations, effectively enterprise
>> > database setups have given FreeBSD a miss.
>> > What could be reason for this ?
>>
>> An obvious guess would be that the userbase is too small and that makes
>> it unprofitable to support the products on FreeBSD.
>>
>> Which then leads the FreeBSD community to give those products a miss and
> use alternatives, or find ways of running them without vendor support, which
> further reduces demand.
>
> I guess from an advocacy perspective, it's hard to get enthused about this
> as the alternatives seem more attractive. It's not like hardware drivers
> that do constrain usage and development.
>
> Tony
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:00:37 +0530 (IST)
> From: Saifi Khan <
saifi.khan@...>
> Subject: Re: Why no SAP nor DB2 on FreeBSD ?
> To: Ivan Voras <
ivoras@...>
> Cc:
freebsd-advocacy@...
> Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0909281659210.98844@freebsd>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
>> Saifi Khan wrote:
>> > Hi all:
>> >
>> > In continuation of my investigation of Oracle, i also noticed
>> > that there is:
>> > . no SAP for FreeBSD
>> > . no DB2 for FreeBSD
>> > . no Sybase ASE for FreeBSD
>> > . no Informix for FreeBSD
>> >
>> > Discouing PostgreSql installations, effectively enterprise
>> > database setups have given FreeBSD a miss.
>> > What could be reason for this ?
>>
>> An obvious guess would be that the userbase is too small and that makes
>> it unprofitable to support the products on FreeBSD.
>>
>
> Thanks for providing the perspective on the issue.
>
> Here is a rather straight query, "how do we grow the userbase" ?
>
>
> thanks
> Saifi.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
freebsd-advocacy@... mailing list
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
freebsd-advocacy-unsubscribe@..."
>
>
> End of freebsd-advocacy Digest, Vol 295, Issue 1
> ************************************************
>
