Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oracle Acquires K-splice For an Undisclosed Amount

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the exit-strategy dept.

Businesses 226

drspliff writes "Oracle today announced it's completed the acquisition of K-Splice, dropping support for Redhat, CentOS, and SUSE, and closing doors to new customers. Unless of course you want to become an Oracle Linux Premier Support subscriber — then it comes as standard."

cancel ×

226 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Thanks a lot, douchebags. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36839894)

On July 21, 2011, Oracle announced they acquired Ksplice, Inc. At the time of the company was acquired, Ksplice, Inc. claimed to have over 700 companies using the service to protect over 100,000 servers. While the service had been available for multiple Linux distributions, it was stated at the time Ksplice, Inc. was acquired that "Oracle believes it will be the only enterprise Linux provider that can offer zero downtime updates."

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#36839994)

Oracle failed to read the license I think.

RedHat, please fork ksplice today.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840058)

Welcome to the wonderful world of software patents. Enjoy your GPLv2.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840294)

Ksplice don't own any patents. Microsoft's patent application on a similar technique was rejected - due to clear prior art dating back to the PDP-11.

Ksplice's value was in smart engineers, but it's time for a distro - a proper distro, that is - to merge this as part of their normal update cycle, and possibly finally implement usplice() as well.

Damn, they were kind of cool until this. Now they got bought by Oracle. Everyone knows what happens when you get bought by Oracle. I'm kind of annoyed. I'm a Ksplice customer. Or was a Ksplice customer, in any case; unless I can get a very clear answer about future support and pricing in writing, we're done professionally.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (3, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840096)

CentOS, copy RedHat's fork of ksplice today*.

*For sufficiently large values of "today".

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (3, Insightful)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840286)

RedHat, please fork ksplice today.

The really shitty thing is that Oracle Enterprise Linux is essentially a fork of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, in the same sense that CentOS is. Oracle has already been distributing a version of Linux that gives back nothing to the company that does most of the hard work to make it enterprise-ready. Now it's adding new components to Oracle Enterprise Linux in such a way as to tell the rest of the community it can't have them anymore. If Red Hat wants to fork K-Splice, that's possible under the license, but again Red Hat will have to do all of the work, and Oracle will contribute nothing.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (2)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840570)

I have heard a rumor that Red Hat is planning to do something to make it harder for Oracle to clone them. I don't know any details, and I'm not sure how you'd go about doing that with an Open Source OS; but the person who mentioned it was directly tied to Red Hat. If they succeed it will make life harder for Cent and Scientific, which will really suck. Red Hat feels (assuming this person is correct), that Oracle is backing them into a corner with the way they sell OEL, and I can't say I'd blame them.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (3, Insightful)

vbraga (228124) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840810)

The kernel patches. Over a vanilla kernel, RedHat applies a lot of patches: backporting features and drivers, incorporating solutions that haven't been accepted into upstream yet, and so on. Oracle cherry picks RedHat patches and offer their own. Now RedHat offers just a single "merged patch" which makes way harder for Oracle to cherry pick wherever it wants to. It doesn't matter to CentOS (and SE, probably) because they just rebuild wherever RedHat delivers.

Anyway, given the amount of resource Oracle has and the slow release schedule of RHEL, I doubt they will not be able to keep track of wherever changes RedHat made.

Search slashdot for this, it was posted here few months ago.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (1)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840814)

IIRC it was providing patches rather than complete altered sources.

obfuscate the build and/or other meta-programs (1)

decora (1710862) | about 3 years ago | (#36841810)

thats what Apple did with Darwin. the people trying to make an open source darwin based distro have been hobbled pretty badly.

so maybe Redhat just introduces a few interesting little tweaks to some meta-portion of their system

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (3, Informative)

fuzzytv (2108482) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840590)

Why is that shitty, exactly? I'm not saying I love Oracle, but the ability to fork is one of the great freedoms with open source - not that every company should breed their own distro, but it's not necessarily bad. Oracle's politics is to sell products with their logos on the box so they resell Red Hat. BTW it's not true they're not giving anything back - according to the stats, they're usually in TOP10 companies (see http://www.remword.com/kps_result/ [remword.com] ). So while I don't like Oracle for a lot of various reasons, I don't think they're not giving back.

Yes, they're keeping some know how, but RH does something very similar with patches (they provide much more to their customers). And you don't have to use their Oracle Linux at all (unless you're too weak when dealing with Oracle sales guys). For example the largest local bank uses plenty of Oracle DB instances on top of RH Linux (and HP Unix), but not a single Oracle Linux install AFAIK.

And this whole KSplice topic is a bit silly - they've bought the engineering team, but the tool is open source. Yes, they'll probably change the license etc. but they have the right to do that and we should respect that. We always knew this can happen, after all the KSplice was a company, not a bunch of our slaves. And the tools is open source, so if it was so valuable for other distros, someone will create a fork. If no one forks it, it probably was not that important.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841188)

The really shitty thing is that Oracle Enterprise Linux is essentially a fork of Red Hat Enterprise Linux,

Oracle provides their own kernel now, and you have to use it on platforms like their Exadata. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that's what they have in mind for this, another bullet point to sell Exadata with.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (2)

starfishsystems (834319) | about 3 years ago | (#36841226)

On the other hand, most people despise Oracle support. I've had plenty of experience with it myself, and I'd far rather look to the community than be obliged to deal with vendor support from Oracle.

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (3, Funny)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840340)

RedHat, please fork ksplice today.

I'd rather watch them fork poshsplice or gingersplice... I'm assuming that ksplice is the new name for kfed after he joined the splice girls...

Re:Thanks a lot, douchebags. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841146)

Aaaand that's why you go open source.
Because then, no matter what, someone else can pick up where you left. (If not, there wasn't enough need/interest for it anyway.)

Sellouts (1, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#36839918)

Rot in hell for this.

Re:Sellouts (1, Informative)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 2 years ago | (#36839962)

They very well may; Oracle acquired hell about a year and a half ago.

Re:Sellouts (5, Funny)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840024)

They very well may; Oracle acquired hell about a year and a half ago.

They won't rot in hell. Hell comes with Oracle Enterprise edition. The Ksplice guys only have Oracle Standard Edition. But they don't want to let go of their existing licenses because the new licenses are sold on a per core rather than per machine basis and they can't afford that. Therefore they only get to go to purgatory, which comes bundled with Standard Edition..

Re:Sellouts (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840776)

Ooh, a fill-in-your-own-joke [oracle.com] ? I love these.

(ROT13ed Answers: bar bs NzoreCbvag, Fvyire Perrx Flfgrzf, be Pbairetva. No peeking!)

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841420)

One Rich Asshole, Larry Ellison.
As if he actually gave a fuck what others thought of him.

Re:Sellouts (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840004)

Fork time! Can't be all that bad. I wasn't even sure it was open source, but Wikipedia claims it is (was?).

Re:Sellouts (1)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840288)

Fork a splice? That has to be redundant lol

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840012)

Who cares if they sellout. It's open source meaning they can easily fork it. The diff is that the original developers won't be working on it. Redhat, for example, could spearhead redevelopment.

Re:Sellouts (5, Insightful)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840052)

Reminds me of that South Park episode:
"What's a sellout?"
- "If you work in the entertainment industry and you make any money, you're a sellout".


Seriously, these guys created K-Splice and they should keep their business going as is, instead of selling to Oracle for (probably) an ass-load of money? For you? Or should they be free to do with their business and their product as they please?

You, of course, are free to create your own version of K-Splice. Except of course that Oracle will have tied up the idea with patents and a pack of blood-thirsty lawyers.

This. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840150)

I'd literally, not figuratively, do things that are best left to the dark corners of the Internets, would it lead to Oracle buying me out.

Fuck this open sores Slashdot fandork mentality. Shakespeare got to get paid, son.

Re:This. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840330)

And clearly, you're no Shakespeare.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840710)

To be honest, yes, they should keep going. "dropping support for Redhat, CentOS, and SUSE, and closing doors to new customers." is simply not worth it. They were doing a great job, and now their product has been transformed into utter shit. Boo to them.

Re:Sellouts (0)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840808)

They were doing a great job, and now their product has been transformed into utter shit. Boo to them.

Oh no their product for a bunch of nerds locked in server rooms got less useful to a bunch of nerds locked in server rooms.

I'm sure they'll be lamenting the erosion of their product while enduring the harsh, uncarring sun on their private beach in the south pacific.

If it's between the 'sanctity' of my work and being bought out for millions. Mmmmmm I'm going to go with the millions. I can make new things that I care even more about with millions.

Re:Sellouts (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840870)

But why sell to Oracle?!
The one company that has purchased and ruined basically every last open source project they have obtained save one or possibly two (I am not holding my breath for the future of MySQL. VirtualBox is about the only project they have kept alive for the time being)

I'm not upset for ksplice selling, I'm upset about Oracle buying it just to destroy it :(

Re:Sellouts (1)

jvkjvk (102057) | about 3 years ago | (#36841508)

Because they were the ones who were buying, perhaps?

I suppose that Slashdot could have gotten together and bought them...

Re:Sellouts (4, Informative)

synthesizerpatel (1210598) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840056)

Yeah, what a bunch of jerks developing and offering a service and then making money with it and ultimately getting a (hopefully) nice payday when someone wants to buy it.

When you think of free software, think of freedom of speech. I may not agree with what you're saying but I'll defend your right to say it. Same thing here. It's not like nobody else could implement something similar, it's just not provided to you on a sliver platter for free anymore so your nerd-hackles are raised.

If you couldn't see this given their long term service model then.. well. Pay closer attention. Any subscription based service for Linux isn't intent on strengthening open source software.

Re:Sellouts (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840342)

There is a difference between selling your company to another one and selling it to Oracle. This would be like selling your gefilte fish factory to Hitler.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840572)

Yeah, and the difference is...

There isn't one. The thing with capitalism is that it doesn't afford you the possibility of having morals. Put another way: how many degrees separated from evil do you have be to be ok?

Re:Sellouts (3, Insightful)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840690)

The thing with a false dilemma is that it doesn't afford you the possibility of having morals.

FTFY.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841150)

That must have been a tough fix, since I didn't even present a dilemma.

Re:Sellouts (1)

PCM2 (4486) | about 3 years ago | (#36841498)

That must have been a tough fix, since I didn't even present a dilemma.

You most certainly did. Several, in fact.

You argued that selling to one party is no different than selling to another and that you can only sell or not sell. That's a false dilemma. Most rational people would agree that selling diesel fuel to the Nazis is a lot different than selling it at a truck stop in Kansas. Even a real bastard would recognize the difference between selling chemicals to a factory up the river from your own house and selling them to a factory in another state.

You then extended this fallacy by comparing selling to evil, which suggests the additional false dilemma that you can only be evil or not be evil. Most rational people accept the existence of grey areas and degrees of good and bad, and some people do not acknowledge the concept of "evil" at all, particularly when it comes to business transactions.

You also made the explicit statement that you can either participate in capitalism or have morals. That's clearly another false dilemma, because there are a great many capitalists who didn't sell diesel fuel to the Nazis, even though that would surely have been a way to make some money.

In summary: Your black-and-white thinking does you no credit.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840698)

Yeah, and the difference is...

There isn't one. The thing with capitalism is that it doesn't afford you the possibility of having morals.

Are you fucking kidding me? So if I discover that it's cheaper to let a couple employees a day get shredded by a widget machine than it is to install a guard, it's somehow "OK" that I let that happen? FFS, you Randroids should be put in fucking cages until you grow a conscience.

Re:Sellouts (1)

sstamps (39313) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840792)

"Randroids".. heh

I like that. :)

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841042)

I'm saying you already do that.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840754)

except worse!

Re:Sellouts (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 3 years ago | (#36841412)

Morals have no place in the business world. If you had your gefilte fish factory and Hitler came up to you offering you enough money to comfortably find yourself a corner of the planet to live without ever working again, would you take it?

If you say no then I congratulate you. You'd be a better man than most of the rest of the world.

One thing to also remember is that our views of Hitler are shaped by the history which was written by the Allies. The reality is that at the time Hitler had a LOT of supporters who would give up the factory for far less than a retirement package.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841804)

You are an ass. Would you make a business killing children for $10 each if it only cost your $1 per bullet? If "morals have no place in the business world," then you should see no problem with that.

The point is that morals only come from people. We need morals; we need moral people; and we need to respect our own morals to live in a world that isn't a cesspool. The attitude you just espoused is sociopathic and was pushed on you to justify others' perpetration of horrors. How dare you just act like it's some great rule of life.

Re:Sellouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841814)

"Morals have no place in the business world."

If Hitler wasn't already in the conversation, I'd consider Godwining this thread. "I got mine" is not a good and sufficient answer to the question of why you did something that you knew would result in other people being hurt.

If you decide you have a price for this, what is your price to move aside so that a killer can get a clean shot at his/her target? How much would that killer have to pay you to take the shot yourself? What is the moral difference in your mind?

"Capitalism" is not a moral compass. It seems like people have lost sight of this, and your opening sentence is iconic of the loss.

Re:Sellouts (1)

Mandrel (765308) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840608)

When you think of free software, think of freedom of speech.

Yes, the most important aspect of open source is libre-freedom, not beer-freedom. But the GPL makes it very hard to charge for freely-forkable software. This pushes commercial open source companies to do things like requiring copyright assignment for community contributions, keeping part of the software proprietary, and keeping documentation closed.

There's no reason the licence for a piece of software can't make it freely-forkable while requiring payment for its use. I prefer a value-added model, where the vendor of a forked version must remit down the fork chain the prices that those developers have set, keeping for themselves any premium their version can achieve. This premium doesn't have to be in features or reliability — a forker may just be a better marketer.

Re:Sellouts (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 3 years ago | (#36841574)

What's the use of a fork, if the original developers can shut it down by refusing to license it? If you essentially have to ask for permission to distribute your fork, how is that 'libre' in any way?

There's no reason the licence for a piece of software can't make it freely-forkable while requiring payment for its use.

Sure. You can write a license that requires distributors to do anything. Just don't expect the FSF or OSI to bend their principles for you.

Re:Sellouts (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840668)

Any subscription based service for Linux...

Doesn't this description basically fit RedHat?

Re:Sellouts (2)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840464)

I didn't see you offering to pay their bills.

Moochers and leachers (1)

decora (1710862) | about 3 years ago | (#36841816)

if the 'linux community' would stop shitting a brick everytime somebody tries to introduce a micropayment system, OSS developers wouldn't have to sell out.

look at ubuntu's attempt to sell music. oh my god, youd think they stuck a baby in a microwave.

meanwhile, independent artists are fully integrating payment stuff into their websites, where you can buy albums and pay 'as much as you want'. or selling advertising on websites. or you know, asking people to give money.

I can has fork? (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 2 years ago | (#36839972)

Oracle may not support non-Oracle Linuxes, but that doesn't mean someone else won't.

Re:I can has fork? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840094)

LibreSplice? FreeSplice? GnuSplice? UbuSplice?

The site is already deprecated, so hopefully there are mirrors out there...

Re:I can has fork? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840158)

Old-Splice... Do do do doot doo do do dooot.

The Splice must flow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840364)

EOM

SUSE? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840014)

I was waiting for that to finally be added. Was it added, and I missed it? Or is the summary wrong?

So much for K-splice (4, Insightful)

etymxris (121288) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840044)

Well, I imagine what will happen is what's happened to other open source products Oracle got its hands on. Redhat and SUSE will likely step up to the plate and support kernel splicing without the help of K-Splice. Oracle is trying to give customers a reason to use their version of Linux rather than Redhat's or SUSE's. However, stuff like this just pisses customers off.

Honestly, I can't understand why anyone continues to use Oracle products any more than is absolutely necessary. It's said that companies only care about the money and don't care about how evil their vendors are. But Oracle time and time again dicks over their customers, and in ways that cost the customers extra money. Eventually executive golf games with the marketing guys aren't going to be enough to keep the sales coming in.

Which I guess is why they continue to buy established firms and fuck over the existing customer base with price hikes, poorer service, and more restrictive licensing terms.

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840210)

Oracle is trying to give customers a reason to use their half-assed clone of RedHat Linux rather than Redhat's or SUSE's.

FTFY.

In a way, it's kind of nice. Oracle will have to ensure RHEL compatibility of kSplice, whereas out-of-the-box it appears the only normally supported options are Ubuntu or Fedora. And since kSplice is GPL2 [tds.net] , that means that the community will benefit from Oracle's generosity and public-minded support.

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840310)

If Oracle own the copyright, which I believe they now do, they don't have to release any future versions under the GPL. Obviously if you can find an existing GPL copy, you can continue to use it, and you can fork it, but you can't rely on Oracle to support it or update it in the future.

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

Temkin (112574) | about 3 years ago | (#36841566)

If Oracle own the copyright, which I believe they now do, they don't have to release any future versions under the GPL. Obviously if you can find an existing GPL copy, you can continue to use it, and you can fork it, but you can't rely on Oracle to support it or update it in the future.

But if that's the case.... Can you link it to the GPL Linux kernel?

Tempest in a teapot...

Re:So much for K-splice (4, Informative)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840380)

In a way, it's kind of nice. Oracle will have to ensure RHEL compatibility of kSplice, whereas out-of-the-box it appears the only normally supported options are Ubuntu or Fedora.

In the announcement Oracle says flat-out that it does not plan to support RHEL. It may be that any changes Oracle makes will probably work fine with RHEL because of the (ahem) similarity between Oracle's distro and Red Hat's, but RHEL customers do not pay Red Hat to distribute a version of Linux with patches that are supposed to work because Oracle says so. Red Hat will still have to do all its usual testing and integration on anything that goes into RHEL, and it will also be on the hook to provide support to its enterprise customers, so whatever Oracle does to the source code saves Red Hat pretty much nothing.

Also, Oracle could easily make its own fork of K-Splice right now and release it exclusively under a proprietary license, because it just became the copyright holder. There's nothing that precludes a copyright holder from making a derivative work based on its own GPL code and releasing it under a different license. If Oracle did change the license, any old versions of K-Splice would still be available under the GPL, but Oracle would be free to distribute any future versions as binary-only modules.

Re:So much for K-splice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841644)

"There's nothing that precludes a copyright holder from making a derivative work based on its own GPL code and releasing it under a different license."

Except, you know, the GPL license itself. Ironic how you used the word derivative, proving the point in your own statement...

"but Oracle would be free to distribute any future versions as binary-only modules."

Again, the GPL license, it doesn't magically get removed by a "new version". They thought long and hard when they came up with it, its not perfect and you can still ruin it thoroughly (see: Tivo) but its not as simple as you seem to think.

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

arth1 (260657) | about 3 years ago | (#36841716)

Also, Oracle could easily make its own fork of K-Splice right now and release it exclusively under a proprietary license, because it just became the copyright holder. There's nothing that precludes a copyright holder from making a derivative work based on its own GPL code and releasing it under a different license. If Oracle did change the license, any old versions of K-Splice would still be available under the GPL, but Oracle would be free to distribute any future versions as binary-only modules.

They became a copyright holder, but not necessarily the copyright holder. If you contributed GPL code to K-Splice, and Ksplice Inc sold itself to Oracle, that would not transfer your copyrights.
I.e. Oracle would have to excise any and all code they don't hold the copyrights to. That may be difficult.

Re:So much for K-splice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840284)

Oh, but we don't use their (Oracle) products anymore. Saw it (this and things to come) a long time ago and adjusted our strategy accordingly...
Oracle has (with us) thus lost many many possible contracts because of their horrible backwards customer-alienating behaviour.

Thus: Gentlemen, adjust your strategies accordingly!

On topic:
Maybe now the other distros will support k-splice (or similar) for their own distro, after all that's better than having a centralized (apparently vulnerable to hostile takeover) party doing that kind of work.

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | about 3 years ago | (#36841198)

I love their modified "Enterprise Kernel" that their OEL 5.6 and above run. Good luck getting VMWare guest additions to run on that.. First thing I do on my oracle test boxes is remove the 'enterprise kernel' and use the stock one. (that redhat builds..)

Re:So much for K-splice (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 3 years ago | (#36841352)

Oracle wants to sell a hardware+OS bundle. The people that buy those bundles will not know or care about these issues. So Oracle isn't supporting RedHat or SuSE anymore, but these customers won't care either since they'll use whatever comes in their bundle. Now if there are existing customers with existing support contracts with Oracle then Oracle will have to provide the support; this may mean Oracle does all the work to change the OS, or it may mean that they actually have to support RedHat & SuSE while still contractually obligated. So I'm not really sure it's going to piss off the customers, at least not nearly as much as it pisses off open source enthusiasts who will never use Oracle products.

Expected (1)

rabtech (223758) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840214)

I believe the software was open source so you can still use it... they just won't be doing the legwork of writing the semantic mapping code when patches require it, or pre-certifying the other patches via the subscription service.

There is nothing stopping RedHat from hiring someone to do this work on their end and offering their own subscription service.

Patents... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840276)

http://www.faqs.org/patents/assignee/ksplice-inc/

Time for the Swedish Kernel Developer... (3, Funny)

sstamps (39313) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840300)

Yorn desh born, der ritt de gitt der gue, Orn desh, dee born desh, de umn fork! fork! fork!

Contempt (4, Informative)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840372)

Oracle has managed to become the recipient of my complete and utter contempt. Even Microsoft has never managed to do that.
I got a call from Oracle at work the other day. The asked if it was a bad time to call. I said "You are calling from Oracle, it is always a bad time." They didn't seem shocked by this.
They wanted to know why I disliked them so much, so I began listing some of their most unconscionable behavior since their take over of Sun, then when I got bored I hung up on them.

They have not called back yet....

Re:Contempt (4, Interesting)

dcmeserve (615081) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840600)

Mind listing some of that unconscionable behavior here? I'm an employee at the former Sun, but I haven't paid a whole lot of attention to the wider business world since the takeover (I'm also just getting back into reading Slashdot...). The main effect of the takeover on me personally has been improved job security in the near term, so I'm curious what else is going on. Thanks.

Re:Contempt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840970)

The two points that stick out to me are the treatment of OpenOffice and Jenkins. Both projects forked because of the control Oracle tried to exert of the course of the project. This [wikipedia.org] page has a quick overview of some other changes.

Re:Contempt (3, Informative)

Unknown Relic (544714) | about 3 years ago | (#36841052)

For starters, Oracle has restricted access to download firmware for Sun servers as discussed in this old Slashdot story [slashdot.org] . Loved Sun's x86 server line, but will no longer considering buying it. Just do not trust Oracle not to screw us.

Re:Contempt (1)

dch24 (904899) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840618)

Wish you had recorded the call and posted it somewhere... Oh well, I can still imagine how it went.

Re:Contempt (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841504)

To the bystander, it sounds suspiciously like YOU were the jerk in that scenario. You just told off phone support reps who have nothing to do with the acquisitions and business policy of Oracle.

Apostrophe Error (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840382)

"its" not "it's".

Come on, DotSlash. I thought we were the more educated, smarter elites of society here.

Re:Apostrophe Error (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840488)

They are correct - it's is short for it has here. It can also be short for it is in other contexts.

Re:Apostrophe Error (1)

bky1701 (979071) | about 3 years ago | (#36841724)

"It's" is a contraction of "it" and some other word, "its" is possessive tense of "it" (unlike practically every other English word, where both take the form of "X's").

Given the sentence, it could be "Oracle today announced its completed the acquisition of K-Splice" or "Oracle today announced it has [it's] completed the acquisition of K-Splice." So yes, "it's" is correct. However, had the "the" been removed, "its" would have been correct: "Oracle today announced its completed acquisition of K-Splice."

Languages are strange. Especially English.

Big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840406)

Yeah, 2-year uptimes are fun and all, but in a clustered VM environment, reboots aren't really that big a deal.

Re:Big deal. (1)

Lennie (16154) | more than 2 years ago | (#36841016)

And what about the VM's ?

Or do you have a cluster with OpenVZ (they do not have their own kernel) ?

Re:Big deal. (1)

The1stImmortal (1990110) | about 3 years ago | (#36841748)

If you cluster at the application/OS level, as well as at the virtual environment hardware level, you can design to ensure phtysical or virtual reboots aren't a big deal.

If hardware/hypervisor needs rebooting - migrate off the VM to another system and reboot hardware
If VM needs rebooting - perform whatever failover steps your application clustering requires (if any) and reboot VM

Either way things shouldn't be a big deal.

BE EVIL (1)

apilosov (1810) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840426)

Oracle needs to take their anti-google stance up a notch - change their motto to "BE EVIL".

they already have (1)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840716)

Their motto isn't "BE EVIL." It's "AM EVIL."

Re:they already have (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841184)

No, their motto is "We do EVIL the best."

Re:they already have (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841410)

I thought it was "We do EVIL right!"

K-splice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840450)

Wasn't that a TV show about some kid, who's missing his belly button, that wants to have sex with this girl, who thinks he's creepy, that he lives with? Why would Oracle want a canceled TV show?

Re:K-splice (1)

RoverDaddy (869116) | about 3 years ago | (#36841178)

No, you're thinking of the movie where Kevin Spacey plays this guy who may or may not be an alien.

Hope the money is cursed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840588)

I really loved using the ksplice technology to keep my personal collocates patched. Now the 5 bucks a month or whatever it was is far to steep. Cancelling account completed.

Hope oracles blood money is cursed.

The limits of FOSS (1)

Anne Honime (828246) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840616)

This case highlights very well the limits of GPL, and at large, Open source. The value of K-Splice isn't in the code - once you know what it does, it's not really complicated to duplicate its behavior. The value of Ksplice is in the commitment from the parent company to provide the patches to the kernel K Splice will apply. This suppose to have a team to track security advisories, study patches, test how they perform, sometimes write a bit of wrapping code around and release those patches as Kernel modules KSplice can then insmod in the kernel. In short, KSplice is more a full time security response team than a GPL software. By itself, KSplice does nothing. RedHat can fork the software, but it then needs to provide the people to feed it.

SuSE/Novell is just as bad (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840664)

They sold out to Microsoft in the same way K-splice sold out to Oracle. Stop kidding yourselves. If anyone forks K-splice it will be RedHat. Novell will just leech.

Before the nerd rage cranks up too high. (0)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840804)

I read the announcement as Oracle was just going to provide technical support exclusively for Oracle Enterprise Server, not that they would take K-Splice completely off the market.

Also the current version of K-Splice is GPL licensed, so fork away. Oracle is free to relicense future versions of K-Splice.

I've seen too may stories knee-jerk condemning Oracle and haven't seen too much in the way of most of those fears coming true. I reserve my judgment until Oracle actually does something bad.

Re:Before the nerd rage cranks up too high. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36840926)

Good points. Hopefully the community can be cough up some qualified maintainers.

I welcome any delineations Oracle would like to make between themselves and the general populace.

Wanna know why? (0)

BulletMagnet (600525) | more than 2 years ago | (#36840982)

Larry Ellison wants to be able to afford every organ transplant known to man ... so that way, Jobs will run out of parts and croak off. He's living embodiment a 19th century robber baron....

Re:Wanna know why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841244)

Considering Apple has about $73 billion in CASH (or otherwise liquidy assets), I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs can have any organ he wants.

Re:Wanna know why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841576)

Awww, what's wrong, did an SS man pee in your cornflakes? Drink it up, like a good little brown shirt...

Can we start developing a FOSS alternative now? (1)

FridayBob (619244) | more than 2 years ago | (#36841012)

When I first heard of K-Splice, I thought it was cool, but that didn't mean I was going to use it. I've used almost nothing but FOSS for just over a decade now. I've supporting it together with commercial products on a few occasions, but in the end have always felt limited, frustrated, or been let down by those products. Such experiences reminded me why I switched to FOSS in the first place; to stop hurting myself.

The open source community should have recognized K-Splice for what it was on day one -- a Good Thing -- but then immediately started work on a free alternative. Sometimes that doesn't happen because a closed-source alternative is already available, so fewer people are interested in developing a free alternative. That's never good. In this case, K-Splice customers probably thought they were paying a very reasonable price for a wonderful and unique product/service, but if they had known what was good for them, they would also have been spending a little extra on the side to sponsor some developers to produce a free alternative.

Don't get me wrong here: I have nothing per se against Linux developers selling closed source software by the license in order to earn a living. We could definitely use some more of those. The only problem is, there's no good reason to trust them any more than we would trust any other commercial software company: in the end, the interests of their customers always come last.

Re:Can we start developing a FOSS alternative now? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 3 years ago | (#36841602)

Hmm, KSplice is GPLv2 licensed.

Re:Can we start developing a FOSS alternative now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841798)

K-Splice is free, the problem really is the way it works, it doesn't just grab the latest kernel patches from kernel.org and magically patch any kernel for you, the patches has to be prepared specifically the exact kernel build(and thus pretty much also for every distribution) you're running (There isn't really a good way around this if you want to avoid rebooting). Since the software is free Redhat can use it to prepare and test patches for their customers aswell. (Or their customers can do it themselves, but i think most would prefer to get properly tested patches from the distributor)

truly awful day (1)

rehtom (2402326) | more than 2 years ago | (#36841024)

for the linux ecosystem. Oracle is a parasite. Ksplice is more than welcome to sell out, but why did it have to be oracle?

First Java, (2)

DeeEff (2370332) | about 3 years ago | (#36841164)

Then K-Splice, and then the WHOLE OPEN SOURCE WORLD.

Oracle will shit on anything and buy out anyone they can in order to do such.

I question whether their management is run by businessmen, engineers, users, or professional trolls.
It could just be both the very former and the latter, but it's starting to get old.

I mean, it's one thing if something like Microsoft buys Skype, that's not so bad, but at least Microsoft isn't retarded enough to make Skype "Windows Only".
If I'm thinking this through properly, taking away the user base of a product is almost a greater hit than just not having the product itself. Isn't the user base and market share where it's all at nowadays anyways?

stupid story line (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841310)

You cannot acquire a GPL project. Oh, you can acquire a similarly named company that supports developers of said project, though. BFD - new developers can come in and take the place of the old, and things continue the way they're supposed to.

Forking ksplice service is non-trival (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841534)

Ksplice is not a completely automated system. It is designed to replace faulty functions but can not change global data structures. Hence, it is up to the user of the ksplice to first clean the patch(es) of any semantic changes to kernel data structures. If the manual process of cleaning the patches is not correctly done, ksplice will still produce an update module but loading the module may cause strange behavior or even crash the system.

It should also be noted that previous to RHEL 6, the employees of Ksplice, Inc. could focus on just reviewing the kernel patches marked as providing security fixes. Because of changes on how RedHat distributes RHEL 6 kernel patches as a single monolithic patch, it would take a lot more effort on the part of Ksplice, Inc. to support RHEL 6 and CentOS 6.

Git repo gone ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36841586)

Has anyone else noticed the github repo for ksplice has now disappeared?

Doesn't that violate GNU GPL2 ?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>