[Info-vax] OT(?): Linux: developed by corporates. *NOT* developed by unpaid volunteers.

[JF Mezei]

On 15-03-28 16:24, johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> What I will say is that if Linux doesn't run (well) on Proliant, that
> would presumably be a rather shortsighted move on HP's part. 

HP _could_ produce the patches and drivers specific to its server
designs and make them available separately, which means they wouldn't
been seen as a contribution to Linux itself since they wouldn't be
included in the generic distros. (I use "could* here to show on possible
way where HP's Linux spending/contreobutions would not be counted in
those statistics of contributors to Linux).

> [1] Not a comment, a question: What HP-unique middleware/LPs is there
> (for x86-64) these days anyway? Some HP-UX derived stuff, maybe?

At the start of the BCS wind down, HP had made statements that they
would be shifting much of the HP-UX enterprise software to Linux to make
it easier for customer to migrate. (this was early in Meg Whitman's
tenure). There was even a code name for this program "Project Odyssey"
I don't think anything came of it.  But HP was using that "project" in
its financial teleconferences to provide confidence that HP was able to
bridge the gap between its legacy BCS that was going down fast and new
focus on industry standard servers with Windows-Linux as its new
enterprise strategy.


One aspect of HP's enterprise is that they are good at using buzzwords,
but apepar to hve difficulty in delivering specifics.

I do believe however that its system/network management software HP
Openview (it may have been renamed to "OneView") would support Linux,
but not sure if the management station runs on Linux).