From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (nat-pix.rdu.redhat.com [10.255.18.200]) by listman.rdu-colo.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h53HPN529615 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:23 -0400 Received: (from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h53HPsF20447 for blinux-list@listman.rdu-colo.redhat.com; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h53HPrI20443 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:53 -0400 Received: from lmaschm.cit.wayne.edu (lmaschm.cit.wayne.edu [141.217.4.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h53HPrH10555 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:53 -0400 Received: from lmaschm.cit.wayne.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lmaschm.cit.wayne.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h53HPlhB003111 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:47 -0400 Received: (from lmaschm@localhost) by lmaschm.cit.wayne.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h53HPlS5003110 for blinux-list@redhat.com; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:25:47 -0400 From: Lee Maschmeyer To: blinux-list@redhat.com Subject: Our Free Operating $y$tem Message-ID: <20030603172547.GA3040@wayne.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Loop: blinux-list@redhat.com Sender: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com Errors-To: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Hi all, I surely do hope I'm wrong in the conclusions I reached last weekend; if anyone can poke a hole in this please DO! I had been using Red Hat 8, enjoying updates on my demo account and feeling only slightly guilty in doing so. Since support for this system will expire at the end of December I decided to upgrade to version 9 so I'd get an additional year of updates. Bad move! In the first place, support for version 9 will expire at the end of April, 2004, so this move gained only four months of support. Much worse than that, though, I am no longer entitled to use my demo account. The demo account was for version 8 only and cannot be moved from version 8 to 9. To be able to use the Update Agent (up2date) on version 9 I have to subscribe to the basic service which is $60 a year. If I'm not mistaken, I won't even be able to hand download new patches when I see them (if I'm permitted to see them) in the errata list. Admittedly I'm least sure of this last part, but even what precedes it is most disappointing. Can anybody restore tranquility to my jangled nerves? Please? And if I'm right in all this, have I inadvertently stumbled into a group of rich folks who thumb their noses at a mere sixty bucks a year? Thanks much, Lee