131–140 of 228 posts
You can get a few more years of CentOS7 supported from TuxCare https://tuxcare.com/extended-lifecycle-support/centos-7-exte...
This sort of language strikes me as fear-mongering. I can't tell which issues they have patched in CentOS7 that otherwise remain unpatched. Anyone know what they are talking about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Legally, yes. Not sure what the point is you're trying to make. Legally, no; unless RH is the only copyright holder, they get to follow the same rules as everybody else, and for GPL packages that means not imposing additional restrictions on redistribution of source code. > If you don't like Red Hat's current objectives with RHEL, it should be as simple as: stop using something downstream of RHEL. People are fine w…
>Legally, no; unless RH is the only copyright holder, they get to follow the same rules as everybody else, and for GPL packages that means not imposing additional restrictions on redistribution of source code. And there aren't any. "RHEL Linux" isn't GPL licensed, the kernel is, and glibc is, and systemd is, etc. Individually. The sources for all of those packages (and ones that aren't GPL licensed, for which there i…
That is why I said "GPL packages", yes.
Okay, so if I buy RHEL, and I download the SRPM for the kernel, and I publish it - which I'm legally entitled to do, what with the kernel package being GPLv2 - is RH not going to terminate my RHEL license?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why i wrote insurance, not insurance for the installation but your job position AKA someone else has to fix the problem ;) Same as: No one gets fired for buying IBM (if your really old...like me)
I thought you just meant insurance as in it's a huge profit center, so it's pushed knowingly that the vast majority of people will never use it. Notice the word use instead of need.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see what separates Alma from CentOS Stream at this point The entire Propose of CentOS was Binary Compatibility with RHEL, largely for Vendor compliance reasons, if a vendor of a commercial software product validated RHEL 7 for their software running CentOS 7 was also supported Running CentOS Stream, or now Alma Linux would not be as their are no longer binary compatible with RHEL. the Hostility of IBM and R…
> if you are running ERP Systems, LOB Apps, or other critical functions that measure their code life in decades That's really what confuses me about the people who use CentOS or Rocky, they want or need the stability of RHEL, so that they can run these crucial applications, that mostly aren't cheap, yet they refuse to pay for the development of the operating system they run it them? I really don't see the point in an…
That made a great deal of sense, as of course Red Hat themselves were shipping a great deal of software written by other people without paying for its development.
There's nothing confusing about people declining to go along with this change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apt purge cleans up user config files after a package, but not package dependencies. For complete package removal, apt autoremove is needed even after apt purge.
So apt uninstall -> apt purge -> apt autoremove That looks like an unnecessarily long process to safely remove a package. Why isn't that the default behavior on Debian?
And aptitude (alternative package manager) automatically removes dependent but not required anymore packages when removing/purging a package.
Well, Redhat has to make money somehow, so this decision is understandable. To me, open-source is about the open, transparent "culture" in which you commit to develop, not about putting things out there for free (as in free beer). Too many companies already benefiting from open-source packages (e.g., OpenCV) without giving anything back to the community.
"Acquire competitor, just to shut down competitor" is a pretty gross (and monopolistic) business practice. So that's a relatively crass way of looking at it.
Over the years I became aware that the acquire-extinguish pattern was definitely not just a coincidence, specifically i remember disney bought up some 'IP' just to litigate against some adjacently-related online fan game in the UK in order to shut it down and 'acquire' its captives, over to a similar product they already owned. Sorry I looked for the exact reference but cant find. There are countless other stories if you look though.
This all came full circle when I was 'enlightening' a young relative who had just finished business school, or rather she 'learned' me. Turns out this acquire/extinguish game is like a whole 100-level course in . Who knew.
Well, Redhat has to make money somehow, so this decision is understandable. To me, open-source is about the open, transparent "culture" in which you commit to develop, not about putting things out there for free (as in free beer). Too many companies already benefiting from open-source packages (e.g., OpenCV) without giving anything back to the community.
Yet somehow even Pablo Escobar understood this and threw away billions just giving money to poor people to keep cities on his side. I'm not even going to say IBM's basic business model of making shit that works, doing at least some complex things reliably and well back when that was very difficult, is invalid. But it is fundamentally different to Redhat's business model, which was simply cultivating a lifelong love of their product in the minds of its users. It's like the Army acquiring the Red Cross. They work in a lot of the same places doing overlapping work and no doubt a lot of corporate synergy could be achieved and administrative overhead eliminated, but it would irreparably destroy a century and a half of goodwill and brand identity. Exactly the kind of strategy you'd expect from people whose decision consequence horizon extends no further than the next three reporting periods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it aware if another package is using the same dependency, so it only removes the dependency if it is not being used by anything else?
Yes, that's what 'apt autoremove' does... remove packages that were installed as a dependancy, but are no longer needed because packages using it have been removed. However, the package could of course still be used by unpackaged software or local scripts.
This is really the time to make a decision, do you really need support..ehm sorry insurance? Then RedHat/Suse/Oracle if not, choose a trusted community distribution like Debian.