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

CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

lists.centos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 642 posts

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#611

Post by Twirrim »

zerocrates wrote: post #481
Twirrim wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not true, because the current CO is not a rolling update. I'm not sure where I claimed it was?

They're saying that Stream will be getting the normal package updates first as a kind of testbed, which is different than before. So you're getting some instability by being first in line for updates, but you're still second fiddle for security fixes.

Ahh okay, I can see how I didn't communicate myself clearly in initial message in the thread.

I was trying to point out this isn't different from a security perspective. Yes the rest of the distro is going to almost reach a rolling state which is definitely not something I want in production.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#612

Post by bayindirh »

pjmlp wrote: post #600
bayindirh wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nope, IBM, Azul, Amazon, Red-Hat, Alibaba, Twitter, Microsoft also seat at the Java table. I know Java has stakeholders but, what I'm trying to say is the table is at Oracle's HQ, not somewhere else. > Should I also start listing the dark sides of each company that seats at ISO C and ISO C++ table? A primer would be nice, actually. > Python working groups also need money from those corporations, and Python is yet t…

> A primer would be nice, actually. Microsoft, the evil company over here, that keeps being compared to Oracle. Several C++20 features like Modules and co-routines were driven by their VC++ implementations. Apple, the company hated over here by bringing the end of open platforms, without it LLVM and clang wouldn't ever exist. Google, the spying company and forking Linux with Android, the second major clang and llvm c…

Oh, I love being generalized.

All big companies have a number of dirty deeds in their history, that's right. But I'm not a person who generalizes this to overall companies, incl. Oracle.

I personally don't use Microsoft OSes, however I have several licenses since my family uses them. I also have a personal lincense (albeit it's booted once a year) for some odd application I may need if stars align on the Friday, 13th. OTOH, I always have praised them for their ergonomics research, resulting hardware and their choice for keeping Kinect open back in the day. I won't ever trust them but, I'm not delusional.

I don't use Android devices or Chrome. Only some Google services. However day by day, I'm using their services less and contemplating to switch over to something like Proton. Also I loathe them for making pseudo-open stuff and closing it later. However, they're pioneer of software defined network due to sheer size of their networks.

I have Apple laptops and iPhones but, my main desktops/workstations are vanilla Debian boxes and always will be.

> You are missing the whole point with Java, it isn't about Java, rather all mainstream languages just like Java only move forward with dirty money (from HN point of view), but hey it is cool to hate Oracle.

No, I don't hate Oracle per se. I only hate their money greed. Especially the money greed via Java. I've used their ZFS appliances after they acquire Sun. They were nice up to a point. I applaud them for the enterprise ecosystem around their OracleDB. I like how they managed to fuse Sun's hardware with their software. But I don't like their greed. Maybe this greed is required from their point of view, but I don't like it.

Similarly I'm not keen on nVidia's strong-arming everyone and pushing people around. Also I don't like their arrogance. Yes, CUDA is nice, it's the de-facto standard for now but, it doesn't justify bullying others around.

Microsoft also contributes to Linux Kernel, I'm aware who's doing what.

> Do you also feel like removing Oracle contributions from the Linux kernel?

No, but I feel like you may like replacing it with a Java re-implementation running on a bare-metal HotSpot VM.

Not liking a part of something doesn't need to spread all over that thing. Do you leave your car to a junkyard because you dislike the engine sound at a particular RPM? Do you change your PC because its USBs are a little slow to a similar model? Same idea.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#613

Post by soraminazuki »

norswap wrote: post #608
soraminazuki wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software doesn’t run on its own. They rely on bunch of other software that is typically provided by distributions. So unless there’s some magic piece of technology that can take CentOS RPMs and make it work flawlessly on any Linux distro, the entire software industry is suddenly going to have to spend significant amounts of time on repackaging work.

But surely if you depend on those packages, you can maybe track (or just collect) their versions, then get the same versions in another package manager (possibly via pinning). Though my experience with package manager is that dependency management is hell (rife with potential conflicts), so I do see the problem a bit better. Still, it shouldn't take that long to fix? Like a few days of sprint to setup Nix or somethin…

I think it depends on the number of packages that you maintain. If it’s only a handful of packages, the entire process of repackaging, testing, and deployment might be doable in a matter of days. If it’s tens or hundreds of packages that depend on each other, I think that’s a whole different story. If those packages are maintained by different teams, it could take more than an year to complete the transition.

As for pinning packages, that’s only practical if you’re using Nix. As much as I prefer Nix over RPMs, not all of us have the pleasure of using Nix at work. It’s kind of a bummer because Nix packages are so much easier to work with and maintain compared to the competition.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#614

Post by bayindirh »

mattdm wrote: post #602
bayindirh wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We will certainly try. Need to mirror a repo, freeze it and update our installation infra so it looks to the local repo rather than the national mirror. All repo settings will look to local repo so we'd have no dependency problem or version creep if we need to install an additional package. Didn't completely think how to handle the occasional emergency update though. Also, we need to compile in some packages. Hope th…

I can totally reassure you on your last concern: everything that goes into Stream is approved for a minor release in RHEL. That's not changing at all. Cutting edge is still Fedora's turf. :)

Thanks, because that last point would be actually breaking in some cases.

I think HN is the only place where you can casually provide feedback and get answers about an OS project from one of the core people in it. Fun!

Glad to meet you, BTW.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#615

Post by drewzero1 »

soraminazuki wrote: post #607
nix23 wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Java , postgres and tomcat That's his stack... >So unless there’s some magic piece of technology that can take CentOS RPMs and make it work flawlessly on any Linux distro, It's not magic, just alien.

> >Java , postgres and tomcat > That's his stack... What’s your point and when did I ever mention Java? > It's not magic, just alien. Dumping the contents of an RPM archive on random distros is never going to work except for the most simple of cases.

Took me a minute to figure out where that came from, it was in the GGP comment.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#616

Post by Veen »

bubblethink wrote: post #494
jmnicolas wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but how long before Canonical pull the same move as RedHat? The way i see it, Canonical is trying to build a moat (lastly with Snap). I think I'm going back to Debian for my servers. i wish they add 10 years lts though.

>i wish they add 10 years lts though I really don't get this fascination with 10 year LTS. Why is it so hard to upgrade in half a decade ? I mean this is such an arbitrary number. If RHEL started offering 50 year support, people will complain that Debian is 1/10th of RHEL.

Imagine you're a web hosting provider who builds their business around automation tools and control panels and whatnot tailored for CentOS 8. You really don't want to have to rewrite it all every couple of years because that's not where your business's value comes from. Also, updating will break a huge number of your customers' sites and apps, which will piss them off and bury your already slender profit margins in support costs.

Most of those hosting customers are not tech companies building fractionally "innovative" CRUD SaaS apps. They're SMEs who use their apps and databases to do real work: organizing their employees, procurement, running payroll, managing delivery routes, order and stock management — boring stuff like that. They very much do not want to have to significantly rewrite the back-office systems their businesses rely on because the OS changed under them. They want it to keep working for decades with as little redevelopment as possible.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#617

Post by nix23 »

skibbityboop wrote: post #439
bluedino wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the usual roadblocks for people?

Needing VMs to perform well, comparably to KVM/Xen, would be a blocker for going BSD. Jails are awesome but not containers you're blocked there as well (if you need containers and the tooling around them).

>VMs to perform well, comparably to KVM/Xen

Bhyve performs very well.

>Jails are awesome but not containers you're blocked there as well

What are containers? Ansible with OS-Virtualisation right? So with Jails and Salt/Ansible/puppet or Templates you have your Containers.

OR just take that:

https://bastillebsd.org/

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#618

Post by nix23 »

soraminazuki wrote: post #607
nix23 wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Java , postgres and tomcat That's his stack... >So unless there’s some magic piece of technology that can take CentOS RPMs and make it work flawlessly on any Linux distro, It's not magic, just alien.

> >Java , postgres and tomcat > That's his stack... What’s your point and when did I ever mention Java? > It's not magic, just alien. Dumping the contents of an RPM archive on random distros is never going to work except for the most simple of cases.

>Dumping the contents of an RPM archive on random distros is never going to work except for the most simple of cases.

That says allot about you packing hygiene, and you don't dump it..that you can do with tar alone. You convert it to a deb.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#619

Post by aprdm »

flatline wrote: post #513
aprdm wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What will change...? A lot of F500 companies have a lot of infrastructure and changes are not fast.. HPC industry is another one of those. Unless you mean startups?

The software industry as a whole has been moving away from major releases for commoditized products like web browsers for a long time. The OS has become one such product. Windows has been planning this for some time now: where is Windows 11? OSX has catchy release names but has reverted to macOS - no number. You’re right, change is slow, but I don’t think it’s an unreasonable statement. Large organizations will event…

This isn't true for internal software tho, user facing, sure, but, chrome dependencies have a version pinned to them.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#620

Post by montjoy »

montjoy wrote: post #592
Jimmc414 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Imagine if you were running a business, and deployed CentOS 8 based on the 10 year lifespan promise. You're totally screwed now, and Red Hat knows it. The hypothetical you posed is the actual situation, I am now learning, I have apparently forced on my team. We've ramped up labor 3x revenue preparing product launch in 90 - 180 days. We created an image containing centos 8 , Java , postgres and tomcat a year ago an…

I’d recommend using Oracle Linux 8 if you still need 1 to 1 compatibility. At my company I’m recommending Amazon Linux 2.

Not sure why I got downvoted. I’m trying to offer the poster a viable alternative to CentOS 8 with a minimum of changes needed. I get that a lot of people don’t like Oracle (and for good reasons) but really they are the best alternative (and free) EL8 disto now.
Post reply on HN