161–170 of 555 posts
I am really interested to know why should anyone go with this when Debian or Ubuntu LTS exist. The two later have not changed their policies in the last decade, and they have a clear path for upgrading. CentOS was always a clear choice for device drivers support, but I never understood the stability claims.
The fact that a majority of the comments are whining about the name really shows you the worst part about open source: the non-contributing but highly entitled part of the community. If you don’t like the name, launch your own CentOS replacement. There’s no better time than now. If there’s one thing this project does not need right now, it’s armchair marketing experts. If you do care about a viable CentOS replacement…
It maybe shouldn't but it always amazes me by how much developers (assuming that is who they are) will subject other developers to the same bikeshedding and minutia type hassles ... that suck for everyone. It's all grounded human nature I'm sure, but man it is terrible. We all are frustrated by that behavior ourselves, why do it to other people?
Bikeshedding-type comments come to dominate conversations because they take less time and effort to compose and express, and therefore tend to get in ahead of and (especially in a synchronous communication medium) crowd out more substantive contributions. While the expertise and temperament of the individual conversation participants may be contributing factors, the dominant one is simply the size of the group.
Great, another Linux distro... I am trying to use something , but I just can't. Spending my time fixing problems instead of doing actual work is fun, for a while. Every damn time I start this one laptop with Linux, trying to get away from Windows 10, there's something to fix. Oh, the undervolt is not being applied, time to build the whole thing again. Oh, restart causes it to wank the hard drive indefinitely for some…
You never hear anyone install macOS on a Dell and wonder why it isn’t working.
So why are you doing this for Linux?
Lenovo, Dell, and other manufacturers ship products that are fully supported by Linux. Use those. If you don’t, you’re on your own.
The fact that a majority of the comments are whining about the name really shows you the worst part about open source: the non-contributing but highly entitled part of the community. If you don’t like the name, launch your own CentOS replacement. There’s no better time than now. If there’s one thing this project does not need right now, it’s armchair marketing experts. If you do care about a viable CentOS replacement…
Or it just means the name does matter to vast user community. And you are hell bent on not listening to user community and not taking valid criticism.
edit: Personally, I've been a heavy user and supporter of CentOS but I've almost never referred to it as CentOS. Because the point is to be binary compatible with RHEL, and it's then naturally almost the same thing as Oracle Linux and Scientific Linux, etc. So I would simply refer to "EL5" or "EL6" in code or other places. This probably won't be any different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
RHEL kernel versions are basically incomparable with vanilla kernel versions. They have hardware support and occasionally entire new features that have been backported from newer kernels in addition to the standard security & stability patches. This means that RHEL 7 using a "kernel version" from 2014 will still work fine with modern hardware for which drivers didn't even exist in 2014.
That is not a good thing. RH frankenkernels can contain subtle breakage. E.g. the Go and Rust standard libraries needed to add workarounds because certain RH versions implemented copy_file_range in a manner that returns error codes inconsistent with the documented API because patches were only backported for some filesystems but not for others. These issues never occurred on mainline. And for the same reasons that th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020. I would say a better reason is that while both are Linux distributions, they are distinct dialects and ecosystems. It isn't impossible to switch, but for institutions that have complex infrastructure built around the RHEL world, it is a lot of work to convert.
OK I'll bite.. How would I run our SAP ERP apps/databases without "running servers that long"?
I am really interested to know why should anyone go with this when Debian or Ubuntu LTS exist. The two later have not changed their policies in the last decade, and they have a clear path for upgrading. CentOS was always a clear choice for device drivers support, but I never understood the stability claims.
Because CentOS on enterprise hardware is way more stable than Debian. I've worked for 6 years as a sysadmin for 300+ servers and we migrated everything from Debian to CentOS and our hardware related issues just went away. Overall we had much less trouble in our systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Thinking back to early CentOS days... My cofounder was Rocky McGaugh. He is no longer with us, so as a H/T to him, who never got to see the success that CentOS came to be, I introduce to you...Rocky Linux" — Gregory Kurtzer, Founder of Rocky Linux and Co-founder of CentOS It's written in Repo's README
No matter how good the intentions are, the name is pretty bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020 The main reason people choose Linux is due to its stability. It is totally ok to run servers in 2020. Also your statement seems the default cloud vendor lingo used to push people to adopt proprietary technology with high vendor lock-in.
I think they only meant "that long". In other words, not for 5+ years without an upgrade. Not that you shouldn't run them at all. Not everything can be highly ephemeral or a managed service, so running servers yourself is totally okay like you said.