June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023) • Hacker News Board

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#221

Post by op00to » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 2:40 AM UTC

jahlove wrote: post #191

op00to wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question I’m trying to answer is who promised what, where was that published, and when was it published. If a squirrel promised me 10 years of support, that’s different than a CentOS maintainer making that same promise on the wiki.

The 10 years of support on CentOS 8 was published on centos.org's wiki: https://web.archive.org/web/20201101131417/https://wiki.cent... Red Hat's explanation was something along the lines that it was a wiki and not guaranteed to be accurate? I don't think editing was open to to people outside of the CentOS org.

I could completely see how one could make decisions based on that date, but I can also see how doing that could backfire. As always, a plan b is valuable.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#222

Post by monkeywork » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 6:05 AM UTC

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #98

monkeywork wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because having CentOS lead to Oracle Linux being a thing which allowed big competitor to offer what was essentially 100% compatible product to your own while undercutting your support costs. I don't think RHEL/IBM cares about the small losses on CentOS/Rocky/Alma/etc what they found was hurting them was companies like Oracle

I don't think that's correct; AFAIK OEL has always pulled directly from RHEL sources. That is, they were a sibling, not a downstream of CentOS. I am open to the idea that CentOS was basically collateral damage as Red Hat attempted to block Oracle, but that's not the same thing.

That's what I'm suggesting - the only way RHEL could block OEL is to also kill off CentOS as we knew it.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#223

Post by rendaw » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 7:50 AM UTC

angry_moose wrote: post #94

bluedino wrote: post #56

For better or for worse, this has caused a lot of software vendors to drop RHEL/CentOS support. Many have started to offer Ubuntu support in it's place. Most of them didn't even try to support stream. I'm not sure what the process behind that was. CentOS was free, which is why we used it. Sure, our SAP boxes run RHEL but the other stuff doesn't. We started moving a lot of stuff to Ubuntu as well. Now, Ubuntu is by no…

> Additionally, Red Hat support is so bad these days. It almost reminds me of Microsoft Technet forums of the past. Random 'techs' offering copy-paste solutions and the same bad information. Yeah, that's been my experience. We had a bad driver package from them completely hose one of our prod systems. It took 3 days and multiple calls from our CTO to get anyone to seriously look at the issue despite being on the top…

I feel like this trains them too. Like, real issues will have a CTO on the phone, so if there's no CTO on the phone by all means ignore the ticket.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#224

Post by oynqr » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 7:50 AM UTC

Calzifer wrote: post #136

behnamoh wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You can skip the uninstall if you use purge. And aptitude (alternative package manager) automatically removes dependent but not required anymore packages when removing/purging a package.

There's also autopurge, which can take arguments of additional packages to purge, like autoremove. So you only really need _one_ command.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#225

Post by npteljes » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 12:31 PM UTC

kstrauser wrote: post #127

npteljes wrote: post #121

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.

True, but its output suggests that you do that and tells you what it would autoremove.

Indeed. So it not only doesn't do a complete job, it "takes prisoners" too. Taking no prisoners would mean it's aggressive, relentless, thorough, and apt is neither of these, it's a solid, professional tool, with some legacy baggage, but at least it's friendly and discoverable about it.

In the current thread, I'm only nit-picky about this, because OP said "Last time I tried `apt`, it would uninstall apps without cleaning after itself". To which to suggest that apt-purge does clean up after itself is incorrect. It does some additional cleaning-up, but it doesn't do a complete cleaning-up.

That being said, of all the package managers I tried, I still like apt the best. I feel like it's the most straightforward and user-friendly of all of them.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#226

Post by phpisthebest » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 1:52 PM UTC

mrweasel wrote: post #48

phpisthebest wrote: post #29

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…

>> but that's not what some people want, they specifically want RHEL, but for free.

Well in my world we used to run many Dev/Training/Non-Prod servers with CentOS and then Run the Prod Servers with Licensed RHEL

Similar to having a MSDN License for Windows vs Production licenses

Then with the announcement of CentOS Stream they tried to sell their Dev program, but that program was TERRIBLE for enterprise use, it was built for individual developers, and not at all compatible with the model many organizations where using. They have since tweaked the terms to make is somewhat more compatible but it still IMO, not very useful for many of the scenarios I found myself in over my life

And frankly I have enough problem keeping track with MS Licensing I do not need the additional headache I might as well just use windows at that point.

Red Hat was able to become a billion dollar company by providing great support, and being easy to do business with, even before IBM buyout and accelerating after their support was becoming less and less quality, and they became more and more hostile / harder to do business with

Many organizations where already questioning their continued use of Licensed RHEL because of this, this like played a part in them killing CENTOS (and yes they killed CentOS, CentOS Stream is not a compatible replacement) as that was easier that fixing the systemic internal issues around support and business processed.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#227

Post by tremon » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 10:23 PM UTC

dralley wrote: post #162

skybrian wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's perfectly fine under open source licenses. You are allowed to build and redistribute your own binaries. That's both spirit and letter. Don't fall for people making up additional terms that aren't in the license.

It's perfectly fine but it shouldn't be cast as "freeing the source code, unjustly locked down by Red Hat", because it's not.

The RHEL subscription license comes with a stipulation that the recipient does not distribute the RHEL sources further, under pain of license termination. I'd call that unjustly locked down by Red Hat.

Re: June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

#228

Post by saaskube » Sun, Jan 07, 2024, 3:35 PM UTC

8organicbits wrote: post #131

iseletsk wrote: post #30

You can get a few more years of CentOS7 supported from TuxCare https://tuxcare.com/extended-lifecycle-support/centos-7-exte...

> Our research has identified numerous critical and high-risk vulnerabilities that your vendor hasn’t patched. 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?

https://cve.tuxcare.com/els/cve?cve=&os=5779c3e2-4d4e-4612-8.....