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

Rocky Linux 9.0

rockylinux.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 178 posts

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#61

Post by rubyist5eva »

jonathanspw wrote: post #60
rubyist5eva wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alma Linux has always been faster for releases since the beginning. I believe their first release was 8.3 and was very ahead of Rocky and they've maintained that pace to this day. Security updates are within a day or two, point releases are within 7 days and I think the 9.0 release was less than a month. This is probably because the project was initially founded by Cloud Linux, which I believe already had the experti…

point releases are usually within 3 days and 9.0 release was within 10 days :)

The Alma Linux team does incredible work, it's my goto distro since it was first released :)

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#62

Post by mattewgm »

5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #17
bubblethink wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are both new. So, this may be a one time thing due to tooling changes or whatever. Too early to jump to conclusions.

It's been close to 1.5 years. I've been using both since the beginning and can see pretty well how quickly both systems pick up updates. But let's just look at release delays (in days since the official RHEL is shipped): ver Alm Rocky 8.4 8 34 8.5 3 6 8.6 2 6 9.0 9 58 Not seeing any patterns here? One of them is being done by a team that's been shipping another Linux distribution for a decade and has the whole proces…

Faster like Springdale? This is an endurance race. CentOS is the survivor of several clones.

"The best reason we have is our speed. If we assume all RHEL clones are equal in terms of software, people tend to then weigh speed and community size/support very heavily. We get new packages out very very quickly because nearly all the rebuilds can be automated. We had PUIAS 6 out over a month before CentOS 6 came out. The same is true of minor revisions - of CentOS, SL, and PUIAS, we had a 5.8 release out first." - "IAmA Developer for the PUIAS Linux distribution - AMA"

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#63

Post by flatiron »

bogwog wrote: post #27
freedomben wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I'm a former Red Hat employee, but only speak for myself. I'm also going to speak very frankly. You got it. From the customer side support from them is cheaper than Red Hat's (sometimes much cheaper). From the supplier side, they don't have to bear much (or any) of the cost of development (beyond infra hosting and re-branding), so they can beat Red Hat's price very easily. I personally find that gross and…

You're forgetting to mention the part where Rocky Linux is not just a rebrand of RHEL, it's a revival of CentOS, which IBM killed off in what's effectively a bait-and-switch, forcing customers to go through the painful/expensive migration process to another distro, or the less-painful but still expensive migration process to RHEL. Rocky Linux is a shining example of both a free market and the open source community wo…

Centos 8 to alma/rocky 8 wasn’t at least for me painful/expensive. I updated my boxes in place.

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#64

Post by orthoxerox »

gravitate wrote: post #5

Why should I use this over, say, Ubuntu or Linux Mint? What’s the unique selling point? And what’s the target audience besides Linux enthusiasts who still distrohop?

It's off-brand RHEL. There's some server software that isn't compatible with any other distro. So if you wanted to run it, you either had to pay for a RHEL license, or run it on CentOS, which was the original official off-brand version of RHEL.

Then CentOS was killed by IBM/RedHat and reborn as the beta distro for the next RHEL release. Rocky Linux and Alma Linux were created to fill this niche. For example, you can run your production server on RHEL, but run your test and dev machines on Rocky while being reasonably sure that there won't be any compatibility issues.

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#65

Post by dang »

Related:

Rocky Linux 8.4 GA - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27579297 - June 2021 (24 comments)

Rocky Linux 8.4 RC1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27568087 - June 2021 (64 comments)

Rocky Linux releases its first release candidate - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27304012 - May 2021 (116 comments)

Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25445725 - Dec 2020 (533 comments)

Rocky Linux: Community enterprise OS compatible with RHEL - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25358739 - Dec 2020 (16 comments)

Original CentOS founder intends to create new fork of RHEL - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25354811 - Dec 2020 (8 comments)

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#66

Post by dralley »

rubyist5eva wrote: post #58
freedomben wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: Former Red Hat employee My info might be slightly outdated cause last I looked into it was a few months ago, but I would guess it's not terribly different. Yes both are essentially the same product. Main differences from user perspective are reliability of package servers and speed of updates, plus community experience if you get involved there (friendly tip: I suggest you stay the hell away from the cess…

What are you going to do when support for CentOS Stream 8 ends in 2024? Alma Linux 8 is supported until 2029 at least - for me it's a no brainer to use Alma for something like a database server.

The same thing all the Debian and Ubuntu LTS and OpenSUSE Leap users would do, upgrade to a newer release.

10 years of unpaid support has always been an anomaly that no other LTS distro provided.

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#67

Post by awill »

stonogo wrote: post #30
5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been close to 1.5 years. I've been using both since the beginning and can see pretty well how quickly both systems pick up updates. But let's just look at release delays (in days since the official RHEL is shipped): ver Alm Rocky 8.4 8 34 8.5 3 6 8.6 2 6 9.0 9 58 Not seeing any patterns here? One of them is being done by a team that's been shipping another Linux distribution for a decade and has the whole proces…

It's amusing that you're presenting Alma as the veterans, seeing as how several founding members of Rocky were responsible for starting CentOS in the first place. But you're right, they're both RHEL clones, so it's only worth differentiating based on externalities. Rocky is backed by industry veterans and part of the 9.0 delay was so they could dogfood Peridot. Alma is backed by a web company who spent the majority o…

I don't quite understand "provisioning and longevity issues, Rocky is winning."

As a user of CentOS looking for a replacement, Alma and Rocky should be 100% identical. The _only_ difference is delay after RHEL launches.

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#68

Post by rubyist5eva »

dralley wrote: post #66
rubyist5eva wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you going to do when support for CentOS Stream 8 ends in 2024? Alma Linux 8 is supported until 2029 at least - for me it's a no brainer to use Alma for something like a database server.

The same thing all the Debian and Ubuntu LTS and OpenSUSE Leap users would do, upgrade to a newer release. 10 years of unpaid support has always been an anomaly that no other LTS distro provided.

Debian, Ubuntu and OpenSUSE Leap all support in-place upgrades between major versions. RedHat/CentOS do not.

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#69

Post by bonzini »

linsomniac wrote: post #51
freedomben wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I'm a former Red Hat employee, but only speak for myself. I'm also going to speak very frankly. You got it. From the customer side support from them is cheaper than Red Hat's (sometimes much cheaper). From the supplier side, they don't have to bear much (or any) of the cost of development (beyond infra hosting and re-branding), so they can beat Red Hat's price very easily. I personally find that gross and…

Former consultant here: There are a lot of entities out there that aren't really a good fit for Red Hat's service offerings, but who may still need the system. As others have said, Red Hat is a great provider if you may need support from someone deep in the bowels of the exact code you're having a problem with. Having consultants out there using CentOS/Rocky/whatever gets these "not a good fit" customers burden off R…

Yeah, that's fine. On the other hand, giving discounts for Linux just because you make a buttload of money from a certain database...

Re: Rocky Linux 9.0

#70

Post by bonzini »

jacobr1 wrote: post #54
carwyn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes further than that. If you file a bug on Red Hat's bugzilla with or without a support contract, you will quite often get a response if you put the effort into producing a detailed report. No guarantee, sometimes just others with the same issue, but still pretty good. You will also find Red Hat employees on the mailing lists for the OSS projects they contribute or depend on who actively participate in conversat…

Is this still true after the IBM acquisition?

There's been absolutely no change for most employees after the acquisition.
Post reply on HN