I'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…
Red Hat offers corporate support contracts, while other distros have community or consultant support at best. This is attractive to executive managers in corporations, as they can be seen as investing into a mature technology, and the systems are contractually guaranteed to keep running by a 3rd party, so shifting blame is easy.
SUSE is forking RHEL
61–70 of 307 posts
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Red Hat offers corporate support contracts, while other distros have community or consultant support at best. This is attractive to executive managers in corporations, as they can be seen as investing into a mature technology, and the systems are contractually guaranteed to keep running by a 3rd party, so shifting blame is easy.
> so shifting blame is easy. But are the contracts actually useful? I wager that to have support from Red Hat is really useful beyond what you may view as "corporate politics".
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#63What is this supposed to be? SUSE responding to Red Hat obstructing RHEL clones by creating a new RHEL clone? Or are they forking RHEL into something that will try to remain compatible, while not being a clone? The latter is what Red Hat seems to want: a broader ecosystem that competes with Debian on community, while allowing Red Hat to sell RHEL with an "original recipe" sticker. SUSE coming out with an announcement…
This depends if SUSE will use stream as a base or not. But Oracle and almalinux will probably base on it with their own patches / support.
> SUSE coming out with an announcement that effectively cannibalizes its existing enterprise distribution kind of makes Red Hat's move look risky, but perhaps not dumb after all.
They already have SUSE liberty linux, which includes support for RHEL and CentOS.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#64I'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…
> I can't figure out why RHEL compat is so desirable RHEL compat per se is irrelevant, it's the 10 years guaranteed maintenance enterprise customers are after, plus a path forward for their third-party software investments only certified on RHEL (because of said guarantees) and internal IT deployment/admin line processes. Despite making the rounds on HN, enterprise and other commercial users give a flying fuck to io_…
Or perhaps they "don't give a flying fuck"?
This ommission of the negative really grinds my gears, and I couldn't care less about American Idiom when it literally changes the meaning of the words.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#65Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#66I'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…
Our contract with the Air Force required that we document guarantees from every parts vendor for the servers we built for them that they would keep making those parts for at least a decade. They also demanded RHEL exclusively. It's a great example of how extreme stability is more important than any other question in a lot of business decisions.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#67I'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…
Why, did dependability and enteprise long term stability needs go out of fashion?
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#68I'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…
The time (some years back now, it was a 5.10 patch and a 5.8 rpm) they mis-backported a perl patch to work around a bug in a deprecated CPAN module for one of their enterprise customers and in the process caused a 2x-30x slowdown of lots of other newer code (including the library that had replaced it in the majority of production environments by that point) was 'fun'. Took me a couple years to get together a coalitio…
That ONE time might have been fun, but with Arch, Ubuntu and so on, you get to have such fun times all the time.
Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#69Re: SUSE is forking RHEL
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How will they confirm that they're fork is compatible? The only thing they need to ensure right now is that their stable release remains compatible to existing RHEL. Everything needed for that is around. Going forward, maybe "RHEL v+1 compatible" doesn't even matter anymore (to quote that press release: "CIQ is thrilled to collaborate with SUSE on advancing an open enterprise Linux standard.") RHEL became the defac…
I’m not saying it’s the best business model just saying that all these companies are undercutting RedHat out of spite/business. Oh well. RedHat should take this opportunity to pivot and do something else. Holding on to licensing is dying especially in the world of clones.
i may be completely wrong on this (and i hope i am wrong) but i have the impression that licensing is the only thing really profitable in the corporate world. i believe support only works if it is combined with licensing because the margins are much lower otherwise. red hat could not pay for all the engineers they have now on support contracts alone.