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

311–320 of 555 posts

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

#311

Post by cpncrunch »

pinewurst wrote: post #301
CoconutPilot wrote: post #296

Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed. I think Rocky Linux needs to put out a plan how they will make themselves financially viable as we've had 3 high profile RHEL respins go down in the last 10 years. CentOS failed twice, it ran out of money in 2014 and was rescued back then by Redhat sponsership. Again in 2020. Another widely used RHEL respin was Scientific Linux which mothballed when RHEL 7 was releas…

It’s hard to continually fund any project defined by its users’ abhorrence of compensation.

I think Ubuntu has a decent business plan, charging people $225/yr to extend support from 5 to 10 years. I would happily pay that in order to avoid having to migrate as often.

CentOS just gave everything away for free and then is wondering why they're not making any money.

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

#312

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

orev wrote: post #177
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CentOS was free RHEL. RHEL is not intrinsically a "server" OS. I developed on a RHEL workstation at my previous job. I'm not sure where the idea that CentOS is for servers came from.

I didn’t say you can’t use it on a desktop, just that it’s not really what it’s meant for. The issues outlined above, like sleep, Bluetooth, etc. aren’t the main things focused on.

I reject that that's not what it's meant for. It's meant to be stable and proven. The fact that makes it great for a server is irrelevant.

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

#313

Post by qz2 »

CoconutPilot wrote: post #296

Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed. I think Rocky Linux needs to put out a plan how they will make themselves financially viable as we've had 3 high profile RHEL respins go down in the last 10 years. CentOS failed twice, it ran out of money in 2014 and was rescued back then by Redhat sponsership. Again in 2020. Another widely used RHEL respin was Scientific Linux which mothballed when RHEL 7 was releas…

Why it failed is because they sold out.

I really think everyone should just say “fuck this”, abandon it and throw the time at LTS Debian. Red hat control way too much of the ecosystem at the same time so there needs to be a strong, stable, non-commercial alternative.

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

#314

Post by quicklyfrozen »

em500 wrote: post #294
netzvieh wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Where do the upstream RHEL sources live? CentOS sources are in https://vault.centos.org/8.3.2011/BaseOS/Source/SPackages/ , but where do they get them upstream? I believe they're only available to RHEL subscribers, does this give RH a way to block clones? Red Hat publishes it's sources on https://git.centos.org . Those are then used to build CentOS Linux packages. In the future they'll do their development there…

> Red Hat publishes it's sources on https://git.centos.org . Those are then used to build CentOS Linux packages. Have you checked if this repo actually works as intended? Because I was wondering if the git repo has RHEL or CentOS sources (or both). So I tried to find out myself instead of just throwing the question out there. It went roughly as follows: - Let me check the sources of dracut (the RHEL installer) in htt…

The RPM SPEC file in that repo will have a pointer to the actual upstream sources for the package. This is a typical scenario -- they are not re-hosting all of the sources to build a Linux distro, just the build steps needed to pull, patch, and build upstream sources.

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

#315

Post by loeg »

cpncrunch wrote: post #311
pinewurst wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s hard to continually fund any project defined by its users’ abhorrence of compensation.

I think Ubuntu has a decent business plan, charging people $225/yr to extend support from 5 to 10 years. I would happily pay that in order to avoid having to migrate as often. CentOS just gave everything away for free and then is wondering why they're not making any money.

RHEL has a business model too.

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

#316

Post by Shared404 »

e40 wrote: post #198

Anyone believe that I will, at some point, be able to point my CentOS 8.x configuration at the Rocky Linux repo and just upgrade to it? That would be ideal. I realized GPG keys will need to be replaced, etc.

I seem to remember seeing somewhere that that was the plan.

How accurate that is, I don't know.

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

#317

Post by macspoofing »

Spivak wrote: post #215
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 creat…

There is a use-case for CentOS Stream, and if all Red Hat did was announced CentOS Stream and kept CentOS proper NO ONE would have any issue with that.

There is also a use case for a production fork of RHEL as well. That's now gone. People who migrated to CentOS 8 because they thought they were getting a decade of support - that's now gone.

So what are you arguing, that the second group somehow doesn't get it?

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

#318

Post by dotancohen »

CoconutPilot wrote: post #296

Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed. I think Rocky Linux needs to put out a plan how they will make themselves financially viable as we've had 3 high profile RHEL respins go down in the last 10 years. CentOS failed twice, it ran out of money in 2014 and was rescued back then by Redhat sponsership. Again in 2020. Another widely used RHEL respin was Scientific Linux which mothballed when RHEL 7 was releas…

  > Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed.
CentOS did not fail. CentOS was a wild success. Like the vast majority of tech success storeis, CentOS was picked up by a major player and turned against its roots to protect the incumbent moneymaker.

But the terrific thing about the GPL, for all its flaws and despite its crazy founder, is that it ensures the health and longevity of a project despite well-funded attacks against it.

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

#319

Post by Shared404 »

Shorel wrote: post #288
nickysielicki wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most frustrating thing about this is that Redhat was making a profit before IBM bought them. They had existed for 20 some years on a business model that business people didn’t understand, and they were able to do that because they understood what open source would become and how they could play a role in that. One of the things that YC is always talking about is that founders looking for ideas should look to iden…

Hopefully. Canonical needs the profit.

> Canonical needs the profit

I'm fine with them getting more profit, as long as they stop ripping up the desktop.

Post reply on HN