Hello all! I just saw that a fair amount - in numbers: 62 - of CentOS 4 packages contain the term "RHEL" (or lower case "rhel") in their name. Though the package name alone does not say much, doesn''t that may be problematic concerning the legal usage of a Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor''s trademarks. Shouldn''t these package names been cleaned as soon as possible? # yum list | grep -i RHEL cyrus-imapd.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 installed cyrus-imapd-utils.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 installed dmraid.i386 1.0.0.rc5f-rhel4.1 installed iptables.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 installed lvm2.i386 2.00.31-1.0.RHEL4 installed openssh.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 installed openssh-clients.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 installed openssh-server.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 installed perl-Cyrus.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 installed ppp.i386 2.4.2-6.4.RHEL4 installed slocate.i386 2.7-12.RHEL4 installed MyODBC.i386 2.50.39-21.RHEL4.1 base MySQL-python.i386 1.0.0-1.RHEL4.1 base alsa-lib.i386 1.0.6-5.RHEL4 base alsa-lib-devel.i386 1.0.6-5.RHEL4 base boost.i386 1.32.0-1.rhel4 base boost-devel.i386 1.32.0-1.rhel4 base cscope.i386 15.5-9.RHEL4 base cyrus-imapd-devel.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base cyrus-imapd-murder.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base cyrus-imapd-nntp.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base exim.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base exim-doc.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base exim-mon.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base exim-sa.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base freeradius.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base freeradius-mysql.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base freeradius-postgresql.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base freeradius-unixODBC.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base iptables-devel.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 base iptables-ipv6.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 base libdbi.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base libdbi-dbd-mysql.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base libdbi-dbd-pgsql.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base libdbi-devel.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base mailman.i386 3:2.1.5-31.rhel4 base mysql.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base mysql-bench.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base mysql-devel.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base mysql-server.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base mysqlclient10.i386 3.23.58-4.RHEL4.1 base mysqlclient10-devel.i386 3.23.58-4.RHEL4.1 base openmotif.i386 2.2.3-6.RHEL4.2 base openmotif-devel.i386 2.2.3-6.RHEL4.2 base openmotif21.i386 2.1.30-11.RHEL4.2 base openssh-askpass.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 base openssh-askpass-gnome.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 base postfix.i386 2:2.1.5-2.3.RHEL4.1 base postfix-pflogsumm.i386 2:2.1.5-2.3.RHEL4.1 base postgresql.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-contrib.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-devel.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-docs.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-jdbc.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-libs.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-pl.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-python.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-server.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-tcl.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base postgresql-test.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base system-config-date.noarch 1.7.15-0.RHEL4.1 base xscreensaver.i386 1:4.18-5.rhel4.2 base I hope I didn''t overview this already being discussed in recent past. Regards Alexander -- Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773 legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.10-1.770_FC2smp Serendipity 20:31:03 up 23:04, 17 users, 0.20, 0.34, 0.52 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil Url : http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050313/cad83d05/attachment.bin
No ... the problem that Red Hat? complained about (and that I disagree with) was trademark related and did not have anything to do with filenames or software content. It was related only to the CentOS.org website using terms in describing our product, in our meta tags, and in linking directly to the RedHat.com website. We are now (and have always been) in full compliance with the Red Hat?, Inc''s trademark guidelines with respect to the distribution of software that is built from sources that they provide. http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/guidelines/page6.html Thanks, Johnny Hughes On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 20:40 +0100, Alexander Dalloz wrote:> Hello all! > > I just saw that a fair amount - in numbers: 62 - of CentOS 4 packages > contain the term "RHEL" (or lower case "rhel") in their name. Though the > package name alone does not say much, doesn''t that may be problematic > concerning the legal usage of a Prominent North American Enterprise > Linux Vendor''s trademarks. Shouldn''t these package names been cleaned as > soon as possible? > > # yum list | grep -i RHEL > cyrus-imapd.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 > installed > cyrus-imapd-utils.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 > installed > dmraid.i386 1.0.0.rc5f-rhel4.1 > installed > iptables.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 > installed > lvm2.i386 2.00.31-1.0.RHEL4 > installed > openssh.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 > installed > openssh-clients.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 > installed > openssh-server.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 > installed > perl-Cyrus.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 > installed > ppp.i386 2.4.2-6.4.RHEL4 > installed > slocate.i386 2.7-12.RHEL4 > installed > MyODBC.i386 2.50.39-21.RHEL4.1 base > MySQL-python.i386 1.0.0-1.RHEL4.1 base > alsa-lib.i386 1.0.6-5.RHEL4 base > alsa-lib-devel.i386 1.0.6-5.RHEL4 base > boost.i386 1.32.0-1.rhel4 base > boost-devel.i386 1.32.0-1.rhel4 base > cscope.i386 15.5-9.RHEL4 base > cyrus-imapd-devel.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base > cyrus-imapd-murder.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base > cyrus-imapd-nntp.i386 2.2.10-1.RHEL4.1 base > exim.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base > exim-doc.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base > exim-mon.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base > exim-sa.i386 4.43-1.RHEL4.3 base > freeradius.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base > freeradius-mysql.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base > freeradius-postgresql.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base > freeradius-unixODBC.i386 1.0.1-2.RHEL4 base > iptables-devel.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 base > iptables-ipv6.i386 1.2.11-3.1.RHEL4 base > libdbi.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base > libdbi-dbd-mysql.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base > libdbi-dbd-pgsql.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base > libdbi-devel.i386 0.6.5-10.RHEL4.1 base > mailman.i386 3:2.1.5-31.rhel4 base > mysql.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base > mysql-bench.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base > mysql-devel.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base > mysql-server.i386 4.1.7-4.RHEL4.1 base > mysqlclient10.i386 3.23.58-4.RHEL4.1 base > mysqlclient10-devel.i386 3.23.58-4.RHEL4.1 base > openmotif.i386 2.2.3-6.RHEL4.2 base > openmotif-devel.i386 2.2.3-6.RHEL4.2 base > openmotif21.i386 2.1.30-11.RHEL4.2 base > openssh-askpass.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 base > openssh-askpass-gnome.i386 3.9p1-8.RHEL4.1 base > postfix.i386 2:2.1.5-2.3.RHEL4.1 base > postfix-pflogsumm.i386 2:2.1.5-2.3.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-contrib.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-devel.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-docs.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-jdbc.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-libs.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-pl.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-python.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-server.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-tcl.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > postgresql-test.i386 7.4.7-2.RHEL4.1 base > system-config-date.noarch 1.7.15-0.RHEL4.1 base > xscreensaver.i386 1:4.18-5.rhel4.2 base > > I hope I didn''t overview this already being discussed in recent past. > > Regards > > Alexander > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050314/8b233adc/attachment.bin
Am Mo, den 14.03.2005 schrieb Johnny Hughes um 11:31:> No ... the problem that Red Hat? complained about (and that I disagree > with) was trademark related and did not have anything to do with > filenames or software content. > > It was related only to the CentOS.org website using terms in describing > our product, in our meta tags, and in linking directly to the RedHat.com > website. > > We are now (and have always been) in full compliance with the Red Hat?, > Inc''s trademark guidelines with respect to the distribution of software > that is built from sources that they provide. > > http://www.redhat.com/about/corporate/trademark/guidelines/page6.html > > Thanks, > Johnny HughesThank you for the answer and the enlightenment. I was - obviously not correct - thinking that Red Hat? cares about the usage of the term "RHEL" in any case. Alexander -- Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773 legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.10-1.770_FC2smp Serendipity 01:36:49 up 2 days, 4:10, load average: 0.17, 0.16, 0.17 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil Url : http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050315/27f004e2/attachment.bin