SUSE is forking RHEL
suse.com
SUSE is forking RHEL
1–10 of 307 posts
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#2Clever idea. They will gradually lure users their way.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#3Clever idea. They will gradually lure users their way.
For some reason SUSE hasn't received a lot of attention even though they have been waving their flag long before the Red-Hat — CentOS brouhaha.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#4I'm continually baffled that so many companies follow RHEL compatibility to this day.
I've been using Linux for nearly 30 years. Admining as a profession for at least a quarter of that. 20 years ago, it made a ton of sense. Today, less so.
The 'stable version but we backport patches' mantra doesn't make any sense today. I can't even describe how many things that have broken that you can't even find an answer for because it was some RH specific patch.
Between Debian, Nix, Arch, and others, I can't figure out why RHEL compat is so desirable. I'll go as far as to say that my Arch boxes have been far more predictable than my RHEL boxes.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#5I guess the unwritten part of that press release is the fact that Red Hat are taking RHEL in some sort of proprietary direction? Is anybody able to TL;DR me an explanation of what's going on?
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#6Clever idea. They will gradually lure users their way.
Lol no. This is a wholly disingeneous move.
"[SuSe] ... announced it is forking publicly available Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and will develop and maintain a RHEL-compatible distribution available to all without restrictions."
How will they confirm that their fork is compatible? Probably using RedHat supplied UBI docker/container images. So they're just becoming another add-no-value clone. Wow, give whoever came up with this idea a nobel peace prize.
Instead they could focus on their own offerings which add value/different value propositions than just being a clone of RHEL. I can't believe folks would be okay with companies coming in and undercutting your validation work -- even if you see RHEL as anachronistic and obsolete in teh world of containers and such it still has value for some folks for its RHEL-ness -- and then coming in and selling clones undercutting support and other licensing/revenue streams to pay for the QA/R&D/devel, etc.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#7I wonder how this will affect openSUSE, will they announce a new product based on this RHEL fork from SUSE?
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#8I'm continually baffled that so many companies follow RHEL compatibility to this day. I've been using Linux for nearly 30 years. Admining as a profession for at least a quarter of that. 20 years ago, it made a ton of sense. Today, less so. The 'stable version but we backport patches' mantra doesn't make any sense today. I can't even describe how many things that have broken that you can't even find an answer for beca…
It's just been the corporate default for so long that people learn it for their jobs and get comfortable with it
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#9I guess the unwritten part of that press release is the fact that Red Hat are taking RHEL in some sort of proprietary direction? Is anybody able to TL;DR me an explanation of what's going on?
Red Hat announced that they are no longer providing updates to the downstream repo at git.centos.org and blamed that a lot of people are taking the sources and not contributing back, essentially just rebuilding and rebranding "their code".
To obtain access to the git repo you now need to subscribe to Red Hat Developer Portal, but there are other ways to obtain the package sources as Rocky Linux is going to do in the future.
This move by RH is not proprietary per se but it does indicate that they are growing hostile towards open source as a whole because it is affecting their business model, and since they were acquired by IBM, now they only really care about the revenue RHEL generates.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#10I'm continually baffled that so many companies follow RHEL compatibility to this day. I've been using Linux for nearly 30 years. Admining as a profession for at least a quarter of that. 20 years ago, it made a ton of sense. Today, less so. The 'stable version but we backport patches' mantra doesn't make any sense today. I can't even describe how many things that have broken that you can't even find an answer for beca…
"Nobody ever got fired for buying CentOS". Till recently.
In terms of actual, material benefits I believe it's simply because transitive "certifications" (hardware, support, continuity, ...) that are implied by Red Hat's corporate presence.