Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Centos.rip

centos.rip

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 144 posts

Re: Centos.rip

#21

Post by speeder »

znpy wrote: post #12
bitcharmer wrote: post #8

I think we all knew this was coming when IBM acquired RedHat. Does anyone know if the licensing is permissive enough to enable Centos spin-offs? If that's possible there's a decent chance some company will jump on it and fill the void.

One could pull the same trick that CentOS pulled: check-out all the sources, replace all the logos and trademarks and rebuild. I honestly hope this is what's going to happen.

Theoretically, CentOS was the RHEL source release.

Now that this changed, I wonder, do RHEL sources are still available 100% identical to their binary? Or the announcement yesterday just broke GPL2 compliance?

Re: Centos.rip

#22

Post by macksd »

znpy wrote: post #12
bitcharmer wrote: post #8

I think we all knew this was coming when IBM acquired RedHat. Does anyone know if the licensing is permissive enough to enable Centos spin-offs? If that's possible there's a decent chance some company will jump on it and fill the void.

One could pull the same trick that CentOS pulled: check-out all the sources, replace all the logos and trademarks and rebuild. I honestly hope this is what's going to happen.

The original CentOS founder already announced his intention to do exactly that. I believe it's going to land here: https://github.com/hpcng/rocky. The thread about the CentOS Stream announcement yesterday had references to other efforts too.

Re: Centos.rip

#23

Post by mhd »

My existential dread about this is worsened when I read suggestions that the best possible alternative is Oracle Linux...

Re: Centos.rip

#24

Post by api »

The writing's been on the wall ever since IBM acquired RedHat, not to mention the fact that the Linux world is otherwise converging on Debian-derived distros.

I personally hope the Linux world converges. There are too many needless distributions whose only major difference is branding and a few file locations and other minor quibbling choices. There is absolutely no value in having both a Debian and RedHat/CentOS in the world other than annoying people who want to distribute software for Linux by making them support two package managers.

Re: Centos.rip

#25

Post by DethNinja »

alfyboy wrote: post #11
bem94 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2020-Dece...

Oh, wow. I'm running CentOS 8 on my home server. Anyone have any recomendations for a good, stable, home server OS?

Ubuntu server is pretty good.

Re: Centos.rip

#26

Post by swinglock »

znpy wrote: post #12
bitcharmer wrote: post #8

I think we all knew this was coming when IBM acquired RedHat. Does anyone know if the licensing is permissive enough to enable Centos spin-offs? If that's possible there's a decent chance some company will jump on it and fill the void.

One could pull the same trick that CentOS pulled: check-out all the sources, replace all the logos and trademarks and rebuild. I honestly hope this is what's going to happen.

https://lwn.net/Articles/786422/

That didn't age well. Maybe we'll see a Scientific Linux comeback.

Re: Centos.rip

#27

Post by JayDoubleu »

mhd wrote: post #23

My existential dread about this is worsened when I read suggestions that the best possible alternative is Oracle Linux...

Oracle linux is not an alternative to anything. Anything with the name Oracle is no longer alternative to anything either.

Re: Centos.rip

#28

Post by mhd »

ddevault wrote: post #17

I would advise anyone who's using this as an opportunity to move on to greener pastures in terms of distributions to consider Alpine Linux: https://alpinelinux.org SourceHut runs entirely on Alpine, as do my personal workstations. It is extremely reliable, stable, and robust; maintainable over long periods of time with minimal effort; and small and simple enough to be easily understood by everyone responsible for its…

I mostly hear Alpine in the context of either embedded systems or tiny docker images. I'm not even that worried about the server, but one of the neat things about CentOS was that I could run the same or a related (Fedora) system on my dev machine, too. So I'd be interested in reading more about your experience with it as a workstation system. Do you use this as a main development machine or "just" for testing server stuff?

Re: Centos.rip

#29

Post by api »

JayDoubleu wrote: post #20

This should really be called RIP RedHat tbh. They've just shot themselves in both feet.

Why the hell do huge companies spend tons to acquire things and then kill them? This seems to happen more in computing than other industries. You don't see shipping companies buying completely functional container ships so they can park them out in the middle of the ocean and dynamite a hole in the hull and watch them go glug glug glug for the lulz.

Re: Centos.rip

#30

Post by anonunivgrad »

ddevault wrote: post #17

I would advise anyone who's using this as an opportunity to move on to greener pastures in terms of distributions to consider Alpine Linux: https://alpinelinux.org SourceHut runs entirely on Alpine, as do my personal workstations. It is extremely reliable, stable, and robust; maintainable over long periods of time with minimal effort; and small and simple enough to be easily understood by everyone responsible for its…

Two totally different markets. RHEL (and its free clone, CentOS, rip) are for regulated industries or anyone who values extreme stability over any newness. You can turn updates on and feel as safe as you can be against known exploits while at the same time feeling as confident as you can that your stuff won’t break. Once or twice a decade, you port to a new version and then go back to not thinking about it too much.
Post reply on HN