Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 555 posts

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#211

Post by bayindirh »

kondbg wrote: post #179

Devil's advocate: why should I choose this yet-to-exist distribution over something already existing, such as Oracle Linux? The most common argument (Oracle is evil and litigious. Therefore, using Oracle Linux will result in me being sued) honestly seems like FUD. All RHEL downstream distributions rebuild the same SRPMs that RHEL provides. Doing a quick comparison over some common packages (kernel, httpd, openssl, et…

> Devil's advocate: why should I choose this yet-to-exist distribution over something already existing, such as Oracle Linux?

Because there's a whole ecosystem (HPC and Scientific computing to be exact) which depends on CentOS (not RHEL, not Oracle, not Ubuntu, not Debian) primarily. A CentOS compatible distribution is not some FOSS pride thing.

IBM and RH really blew a sucker punch in this regard.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#212

Post by houseofzeus »

joana035 wrote: post #17
tmoravec wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debian offers around three years of support. Ubuntu LTS around five. Both pale in comparison with Red Hat and, by proxy, CentOS.

Right, but the price one pays are outdated packages. CentOS 8 was released few days ago with kernel 4.18, which not even LTS is, and is older than the current Debian stable kernel(!). If you need to install anything besides the base distro you need elrepo, epel, etc which I'm not sure can be counted as part of the support.

The kind of people that are up in arms that CentOS 8 isn't going to be supported through to 2029 are using it because it has outdated packages.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#213

Post by wayneftw »

hnarn wrote: post #124

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…

Pffft. Imagine coming to a forum where people commonly give their opinions only to accuse them of "whining" and "entitlement" when they simply give an opinion that you don't like.

As if questioning whether a project name is any good suddenly equates to an application to be an "idea guy" or a logo designer.

If you don't like the majority opinion about something as trivial as a name, stop visiting this forum. Does that advice sound familiar? Perhaps it doesn't feel fair for someone to offer you only one of 2 extremes? Hmmmm.

The last thing this forum needs is another open source warrior patronizing everyone for participating here.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#214

Post by throwaway092835 »

viraptor wrote: post #143
mmrezaie wrote: post #3

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.

Apart from the long support, RHEL based distros also give you built in selinux support. Apparmor exists, but it's not comparable in features and existing policies.

selinux is provided by Debian as well and it's hardly a popular (or very useful) feature compared to daemon and application sandboxing.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#215

Post by Spivak »

electrotype wrote: post #163

Someone care to explain why did CentOS switch from downstream to upstream builds? I guess there is a reason.

The old model went something like this.

- Fedora does its thing informed by but somewhat independently of RHEL.

- Red Hat chooses a Fedora release to be the base of RHEL, forks it, and starts working on it.

- This eventually becomes RHEL X.

- Red Hat then forks RHEL X to create the RHEL X.0 Beta and eventually the RHEL X.0 release. RHEL X keeps getting work done on it which eventually lead to another fork which creates RHEL X.1 Beta and RHEL X.1.

- After each RHEL X.y is released CentOS starts the process of rebuilding it from the sources and tracking upstream changes.

The new model puts CentOS where RHEL X is and so RHEL X.y are actually forks of CentOS.

This change matters a lot to you if you care a lot about the difference between the minor releases of RHEL because there won't be CentOS 7.1 CentOS 7.3 but just CentOS 7. If you just yum update on CentOS then you probably don't care since by default it will move you up minor versions. You have to try to stay on a specific minor version.

What's nice about this change is that anyone can peel off releases from CentOS the same way Red Hat will do to make RHEL and new features become available when they're ready instead of being batched.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#216

Post by sabas_ge »

awill wrote: post #193
ignoranceprior wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. I'm confused why everyone is complaining about the "Rocky" part, which is a nice tribute and sounds pretty decent, when the actual problem is the "Linux" part. It should really be called "Rocky GNU/Linux", or "Rocky GNU+Linux", because the Linux kernel is only one component of a complete GNU-based operating system compatible with the POSIX standard.

I guess we found Richard Stallman's hacker news account.

It's part of the notorious copypasta https://wiki.installgentoo.com/wiki/Interjection

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#217

Post by em500 »

mmrezaie wrote: post #4
mmrezaie wrote: post #3

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.

By understanding the stability I mean the other two are as stable as far as I have experienced them in the last decade.

To system administrators and people managing large fleets of servers "stability" usually means "doesn't change much" rather than "doesn't crash". In that sense, RHEL tended to be more stable than Debian / Ubuntu. Though that may change somewhat with Ubuntu's recent 10 year LTS plans.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#218

Post by throwawaygulf »

na85 wrote: post #201
ignoranceprior wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. I'm confused why everyone is complaining about the "Rocky" part, which is a nice tribute and sounds pretty decent, when the actual problem is the "Linux" part. It should really be called "Rocky GNU/Linux", or "Rocky GNU+Linux", because the Linux kernel is only one component of a complete GNU-based operating system compatible with the POSIX standard.

I'm so tired of this drivel. It's called Linux because GNU is awful at naming things. The name "Gahnoo" is too awkward to pronounce and "Gahnoo plus Linux" is too long. People shorten names for convenience. Deal with it or come up with a better name than GNU.

Whoosh!

https://stallman-copypasta.github.io/

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#219

Post by that_guy_iain »

kondbg wrote: post #179

Devil's advocate: why should I choose this yet-to-exist distribution over something already existing, such as Oracle Linux? The most common argument (Oracle is evil and litigious. Therefore, using Oracle Linux will result in me being sued) honestly seems like FUD. All RHEL downstream distributions rebuild the same SRPMs that RHEL provides. Doing a quick comparison over some common packages (kernel, httpd, openssl, et…

> Devil's advocate: why should I choose this yet-to-exist distribution over something already existing, such as Oracle Linux?

Because you want what CentOS was and this is basically going to be what CentOS was. Different name, different people, but same prinicple.

Re: Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

#220

Post by stan_rogers »

rovr138 wrote: post #78
_jal wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just how like corporations would never take a company called 'Google' seriously. Ignore the peanut gallery, it is a fine name.

they couldn't even fix they typo!

Googol.com was older, and in the early days of Google featured a prominent "you're probably looking for these guys, not this site" on their front page. (It was, at the time, a math site dedicated mostly to the number.)
Post reply on HN