It's curious that RHEL/CentOS 8 is using nftables instead of iptables by default and yet the next release of Fedora will continue to use iptables.
CentOS Stream
51–54 of 54 posts
Re: CentOS Stream
#52>CentOS Stream is parallel to existing CentOS builds So why does regular CenOS exist in this day and age given its semi-official status under the RH umbrella ? Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? Isn't it a massive waste of everyone's resources to rebuild everything and remove the trademarks? This seems like a more interesting future for CentOS to have as something different from baseline RHEL.
> Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? They do: it's called CentOS. CentOS was acquired by RedHat in 2014, keeping an independent governance body. But the reason RedHat didn't release itself as open source was Oracle. They were rebuilding RHEL and reselling it, so RedHat closed up its process and did the bare minimum required to comply with the GPL. Brian Stevens confirmed it. So now RedHat exist…
It's worth noting that the existential threat has eased a lot for Red Hat. Openshift is growing as alternative revenue stream but has a long way to go before it replaces RHEL subscriptions. But now that IBM is keeping the lights on, Red Hat has at least a decade of breathing room it didn't have before. It can afford to loosen the RHEL reigns a bit.
Disclosure: I work for Pivotal, we compete against Red Hat in a number of ways.
Re: CentOS Stream
#53>CentOS Stream is parallel to existing CentOS builds So why does regular CenOS exist in this day and age given its semi-official status under the RH umbrella ? Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? Isn't it a massive waste of everyone's resources to rebuild everything and remove the trademarks? This seems like a more interesting future for CentOS to have as something different from baseline RHEL.
Because they don't want to deal with someone who goes 5 years without support, runs into a hard system down situation, then tries to buy support on the spot.
While they can absolutely insist the customer pay support back 5 years, the political fallout is always ugly.
Re: CentOS Stream
#54>CentOS Stream is parallel to existing CentOS builds So why does regular CenOS exist in this day and age given its semi-official status under the RH umbrella ? Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? Isn't it a massive waste of everyone's resources to rebuild everything and remove the trademarks? This seems like a more interesting future for CentOS to have as something different from baseline RHEL.
> Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? They do: it's called CentOS. CentOS was acquired by RedHat in 2014, keeping an independent governance body. But the reason RedHat didn't release itself as open source was Oracle. They were rebuilding RHEL and reselling it, so RedHat closed up its process and did the bare minimum required to comply with the GPL. Brian Stevens confirmed it. So now RedHat exist…
The crucial difference between CentOS and RHEL is the speed of security updates. While CentOS is building a new RHEL point release there are no security updates!
This makes me unhappy to connect a CentOS machine to a production network, let alone put it on the Internet.
In addition the metadata that lets you install only security updates or bugfixes is not present in CentOS.