What's wrong with enterprise Linux • Hacker News Board

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#151

Post by noizejoy » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:23 PM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #132

cylo wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi. Author here. I’m not a sockpuppet and genuinely have no affiliation with Oracle. It’s purely my own technical opinion. I only recently registered the site and set up the blog because I had nowhere else to post it and did not want to use a hosted platform like Medium. I was watching the recent Red Hat debacle from the sidelines and had some thoughts to put together about the general Enterprise Linux model.

Okay, that's fair, but do you kind of see how a shiny new domain name & blog with exactly one post and an anonymous author saying you can trust them because they're not affiliated with Oracle... Can you see how that appeal for trust hasn't been built on firm ground?

I didn’t see a particular appeal for trust in the OP. Not mentioning anything about non association would have seemed weirder.

Sometimes it’s interesting to read or hear from someone with a high trust score.

Other times it’s interesting to read or hear a line of reasoning without - or even negative - trust score.

Only going by trust arguably is one of the fundamental problems with tribalism and echo chambers.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#152

Post by l0b0 » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:25 PM UTC

Reminds me of CERN Linux, which was downstream of RHEL when I was there. It took several years to certify all the CERN software on a new release, which surely must've cost the org many more years of cumulative developer productivity.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#153

Post by fsflover » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:27 PM UTC

thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #148

fsflover wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Qubes OS style, where everything runs in a VM?

>> How about Qubes OS style, where everything runs in a VM? How does Qubes OS work with drivers for specialized hardware such as scientific lab equipment?

Usually devices are connected to specific VMs and the drivers are installed inside them. VMs can run Lunux or Windows. See this: https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/how-to-use-devices/

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#154

Post by reverius42 » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:28 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #76

wmf wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't surprise me. Mainframes aren't just about never failing; they have a whole culture, including ops, around providing availability in ways that actually work.

Starting by having systems programming languages that actually have proper strings, arrays and bounds checking.

What are some of those languages? I'm curious to learn more.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#155

Post by hju22_-3 » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:38 PM UTC

thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #148

fsflover wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Qubes OS style, where everything runs in a VM?

>> How about Qubes OS style, where everything runs in a VM? How does Qubes OS work with drivers for specialized hardware such as scientific lab equipment?

Depends, I think. I remember you being able to finagle a passthrough of devices, the underlying software can do that with little issue and once passed through it shouldn't be an issue, but I vaguely remember there being some notion of that being dissuaded. Mostly because of the increased attack surface, I think. Though that was a few years ago now.

Qubes OS doesn't really solve much in regards to stability and work required to update in a professional setting though, I'd say.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#156

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:39 PM UTC

mananaysiempre wrote: post #61

bogantech wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd like to see the RHEL stability model go away too and force people to complete their automation and solve the problems of being able to rebuilding on demand - and actually doing it. Whenever there's a new distribution release it invariably breaks a bunch of things with the automation and you spend more time massaging your playbook so it works again than it would have taken to do it by hand

> Whenever there's a new distribution release it invariably breaks a bunch of things with the automation and you spend more time massaging your playbook so it works again than it would have taken to do it by hand The rolling-release life is that things break constantly, during each week’s upgrade, but only a little bit at a time (and hopefully in staging). I don’t know if this is better for system administration, nec…

[deleted]

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#157

Post by ineedasername » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:41 PM UTC

cylo wrote: post #139

ineedasername wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, that's fair, but do you kind of see how a shiny new domain name & blog with exactly one post and an anonymous author saying you can trust them because they're not affiliated with Oracle... Can you see how that appeal for trust hasn't been built on firm ground?

Sure, I suppose. I've never been called a sockpuppet before so I'm simultaneously insulted but also...honored in an odd way? Anyway, I'm not sure what else you'd have me do here. We all have to start somewhere. I put my thoughts out there under something I directly control and I'd rather people focus on the central thesis of the thoughts being proposed over resorting to personal attacks. I'll continue posting small e…

I didn't mean to say you were wrong in what you chose to write, but also that it wasn't wrong for someone to be highly skeptical of its authenticity. Write what you want and people will take it as they will, I just wanted to point out that how the GP comment took it wasn't without some basis.

As to the merits of your thesis, I'll outline my understanding of it & my thoughts in response:

1) You're proposing OEL as an alternative for RHEL (and other such offerings)

2) People might object to it based on Oracle's reputation (well deserved)

3) People should put that repulsion aside though because...

4) Oracle really is letting people use it for free so users don't have to enter into a $ relationship with this predatory company

However:

People choose RHEL (or any paid enterprise distro) primarily because of the support contracts that guarantee service. This undermines your appeal in #3 & #4 above because it requires the exact thing you're saying users can avoid to overcome their repulsion.

Also, if enough people start using this distro then I have no doubt that Oracle will at some point switch things up and try to monetize that userbase under threat of crippling legal bills.

I say all of this as someone who has actually been deposed by lawyers in a lawsuit with Oracle, where events leading up to the lawsuit were very much a bait-and-switch. I won't bog down this comment with the details but if you're interested in the exact nature of that bait & switch let me know and I'll comment in reply-- it may change your mind (or not) about trusting Oracle not to do something like that with OEL

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#158

Post by vbezhenar » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:41 PM UTC

rightbyte wrote: post #99

darkhelmet wrote: post #7

There is another problem that wasn't covered in the article. The 10+ years of stability leads to behaviors and outcomes that remind me of the long-lived SSL certificate problem. Updating is done so infrequently that the "how?" is forgotten. As the 10 year support limit approaches, most of the old team members who did it last time are gone, tech debt is through the roof, few people know where everything is or how to b…

If certificate renewal is automatic why do it at all ...

To ensure that those who possess the certificate, still control the domain.

The main issue is that certificates should really be automated by every web server by default. At least for those with public IP addresses. There are servers like Caddy which implemented it, but it should be basic feature that just works without any additional configuration.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#159

Post by vbezhenar » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:45 PM UTC

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #48

darkhelmet wrote: post #7

There is another problem that wasn't covered in the article. The 10+ years of stability leads to behaviors and outcomes that remind me of the long-lived SSL certificate problem. Updating is done so infrequently that the "how?" is forgotten. As the 10 year support limit approaches, most of the old team members who did it last time are gone, tech debt is through the roof, few people know where everything is or how to b…

I wonder if there would be a market for an enterprise-grade server microkernel OS. It's not the 90s anymore - Nintendo and QNX are shipping tens of millions of microkernel installs every year; and hardware is fast enough that choosing correctness and security over speed is a valid tradeoff. Maybe if I win the lottery...

Kaspersky recently developed their own proprietary microkernel OS. AFAIK they target it for IoT, but kernel is kernel, probably could be used with ordinary servers as well.

Main issue is drivers, of course. It's hard to beat Linux. It contains open source drivers and server vendors usually target Linux and Windows with their driver efforts.

Re: What's wrong with enterprise Linux

#160

Post by ineedasername » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 9:49 PM UTC

noizejoy wrote: post #151

ineedasername wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, that's fair, but do you kind of see how a shiny new domain name & blog with exactly one post and an anonymous author saying you can trust them because they're not affiliated with Oracle... Can you see how that appeal for trust hasn't been built on firm ground?

I didn’t see a particular appeal for trust in the OP. Not mentioning anything about non association would have seemed weirder. Sometimes it’s interesting to read or hear from someone with a high trust score. Other times it’s interesting to read or hear a line of reasoning without - or even negative - trust score. Only going by trust arguably is one of the fundamental problems with tribalism and echo chambers.

>I didn’t see a particular appeal for trust in the OP

It's implicit within the statement that they don't have a conflict of interest. Trust is precisely what conflicts of interest are about, where their presence often (maybe not always) introduces the need to be more skeptical of the person's motives, i.e., less trust.