11 ms·

Wonder if the web hosting industry will rebel and build another RHEL clone project that just gets the 10-year supported patches. Red Hat still has to release th

by apecat 6y ago

Wonder if the web hosting industry will rebel and build another RHEL clone project that just gets the 10-year supported patches. Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? A really big chunk of the world's traditionally shared hosted websites run on CentOS, because most commercial control panel packages and hosting automation systems are built for that. A rebadged CentOS is also AWS's default distro. Wonder of the hosting industry, AWS included, will build a new stable clone of RHEL 8's upstream security patches. There are some big companies, like GoDaddy in there, whose business models are unlikely to accommodate for RHEL support subscriptions. This is truly a bummer, and if someone doesn't pick up the pieces and continue offer RHEL rebranded, there's no(?) open sauce operating system with a decade-long support lifecycle. I wonder if this might cause an increase in unpatched servers and appliances when the alternatives offer five years at best.

posix_me_less 6y ago
That would be cool "stick it to the man" trick, but how do we organize?
- apecat 6y ago
  Well, GoDaddy, or heh, AWS are The Man. My best hope is that the major hosting vendors, or maybe some industry consortium might offer resources for this.
  - syshum 6y ago
    AWS already has their on RHEL Clone, Amazon Linux, for use on AWS
  - apecat 6y ago
    @syshum, yes, but it's not exacly RHEL, and it's not distributed outside AWS https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25347232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25347232 But the point is indeed that there are resources and infrastructure, so one might be hopeful that there will be a good outcome. One possible outcome would be increased demand and resources for Debian and/or Ubuntu and I definitely wouldn't mind that (five years of support isn't all that much in IT). Realistically though, a lot of people need RHEL for free and I suspect there will be a way.
    - posix_me_less 6y ago
      Yeah, resources and infrastrucure are not some magic that only Redhat can provide. If sources will be released on https://git.centos.org/ https://git.centos.org/ or somewhere else, then it may work. Just like the old times [1] [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/128952/ https://lwn.net/Articles/128952/
    - InvaderFizz 6y ago
      > @syshum, yes, but it's not exacly RHEL, and it's not distributed outside AWS On the first point you are correct. It's not exactly RHEL7. On the second point, Amazon provides images for running on prem[0]. We run a lot of dev AmazonLinux2 VMs on prem so that the local computing environment matches the deployed EC2 environment. 0: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/amazon-linux-2-virtual-machine.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/amazon-l...
      - apecat 6y ago
        @invaderFizz: oh, this is useful to me, thanks!
- rbowen 6y ago
  Not only does this not "stick it to the man", it's directly addressed in the FAQ. If folks want to boot up another rebuild project, there's nothing preventing that. There are also several existing ones that you could go join.
  - thayne 6y ago
    CentOS started out as just such a project...
zxspectrum1982 6y ago
That already exists and is called CloudLinux. It is very cheap but not free. Other RHEL-clones: Oracle Linux (best one), Springdale Linux. Other alternatives: openSUSE Leap and Debian. I am not even listing Ubuntu because I hate it since snaps.
- apecat 6y ago
  Oh cool. As for CloudLinux, "not free" probably scale for some hosting environments, including non-managed cloud instances. But something like Springdale, given resources, might be able to provide. They're still tracking RHEL 7, though. Debian and Ubuntu, which offer five years of Long Term Support are the next best thing available, and that's already kind of tight for long-term deployments of self-hosted, old-fashioned business software. Debian is particularly impressive, since they, on paper, aim to support all packages with security fixes, whereas Ubuntu's main repo is a lot more limited. OpenSUSE Leap versions seem to get three years, which really isn't enough software that needs to just work for a long while.
  - zxspectrum1982 6y ago
    Springdale Linux is on RHEL 8.3 but their homepage is awfully out of date. Here's the full ISO for 8.1: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.1/x86_64/iso/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.1/x86_64/iso/ And then you can add the repos to update to 8.3: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/ Or you can take the small ("boot") ISO and install 8.3 directy: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/x86_64/os/images/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/x86_64/os/images/ In fact, they are even building Springdale Linux 8 for i386, which RHEL and CentOS never did. If you need more than three years on openSUSE Leap, then you need to upgrade to SUSE Linux Enterprise Server.
  - Thaxll 6y ago
    I trust Canonical more than Debian for security fixes. Canonical has a dedicated security team.
    - 6y ago
voxadam 6y ago
FAQ: CentOS Stream Updates @ Red Hat[0] Q: What does this mean for users of CentOS Linux? The creation of CentOS Stream provides a new mechanism for partners and community members to add innovation to the next version of RHEL as it’s being built instead of after it’s built. We also recognize that there are different kinds of CentOS Linux users, and we are working with the CentOS Project Governing Board to tailor programs that meet the needs of different user groups. In the first half of 2021, we will be introducing low- or no-cost programs for a variety of use cases, including options for open source projects and communities, partner ecosystems and an expansion of the use cases of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux Developer subscription to better serve the needs of systems administrators and partner developers. We’ll share more details on these initiatives as they become available. For those converting to RHEL, there is guidance available today for converting from CentOS Linux to RHEL. [0] https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q10 https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q10
- em500 6y ago
  LOL at the corporate guff. The primary use case of CentOS is "I want to run RHEL without paying anyone anything". The best way to "serve that need"? Don't kill off CentOS 8.3+.
  - vbezhenar 6y ago
    Actually the best way is to allow free use of RHEL for those who don't want to pay for it.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
      I mean, that's de-facto what CentOS was; RHEL but non-paid and with different branding. But I mean... they were built from the (exact) same sources, so similar that you could convert between them by un/installing a few packages.
      - vbezhenar 6y ago
        The difference is that CentOS is really free. RHEL free will be whatever RedHat wants. Of course it won't be as free as CentOS. But if it'll be free enough to satisfy most CentOS users, that might be good enough.
vbezhenar 6y ago
> Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? I think that's a gray area. For example RHEL has some support branches where they'll produce security updates for minor updates. For example you can pay a lot of money and you'll get RHEL 7.2 with security updates. They won't release sources for those packages unless you'll ask for those packages (you, as a paid client, not you as nobody in the Internet). But if you'll ask sources and then publish those sources in the internet again and again, so other entity like CentOS or whatever could pick them up and build CentOS 7.2 LTS, they will terminate your contract. So that's a weakness in GPL. You won't break any law, but they'll just terminate contracts with those who publish those sources. So those sources are effectively unavailable for a large public. Currently they publish their mainstream branch sources to the public. But they could stop doing that any time and only provide those sources to their clients on request.
- ossusermivami 6y ago
  I'll be uninstalling my fedora laptop if they do this!
  - enz 6y ago
    Why?
    - ossusermivami 6y ago
      because everything red hat is pissing me off right know maybe get better in the future.
- wang_li 6y ago
  > They won't release sources for those packages unless you'll ask for those packages (you, as a paid client, not you as nobody in the Internet). If the code in question is licensed under the GPL and Red Hat isn't the owner of the code, then I as a rando on the Internet can ask them for the source and if they don't provide it, the person who does own the code can sue them and revoke their license to distribute said code. And I'd say that the majority of code in RHEL is not owned by Red Hat.
bayindirh 6y ago
There's a silent but relatively big user base of CentOS in HPC and scientific computing. ScientificLinux and CentOS rules all HPC clusters. Clusters are like enterprise servers. Big, monolithic, rarely upgraded. They're upgraded in one big-fell swoop and left to run. There'll be another clone of RHEL since HPC can't accept CentOS Stream as the alternative. The whole infra is too big to move to Debian too. So with today's announcement, a new distro is born. Also Greg (CentOS' founder's) domain (HPCng) is very telling... We'll see. We're in for a hell of a ride. If you excuse me, I need to dust-off my XCAT servers...
- chasil 6y ago
  Oracle already has a clone that performs an in-place conversion of an installed CentOS 7 system. There is a page describing the conversion: https://linux.oracle.com/switch/centos/ https://linux.oracle.com/switch/centos/ They have a shell script to convert a CentOS install to Oracle Linux, so you can buy support if you want. The converter only works with versions 5, 6, and 7. It does not work with CentOS 8. It would be nice if that could get updated.
  - IntelMiner 6y ago
    I don't think many people who want to use something stable like CentOS, but don't want to pay for a RHEL support contract would want to pay Oracle for RHEL-but-with-Oracle-sprinkles-on-top
    - kbenson 6y ago
      Not to mention Oracle is not known to leave money on the table, and if they see they can start charging for Oracle Linux because there's no large well known free version, I wouldn't put it past them. Put another way, if you jump ship from CentOS because IBM caused Red Hat to change it into a funnel to pay them money, if you landed on Oracle, you might be setting yourself up to do it all over again fairly soon.
      - blaser-waffle 6y ago
mattdm 6y ago
> Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? Whether or not Red Hat "has to", Red Hat is an all open source company and does and will.
- toxic 6y ago
  Redhat is a fully-owned subsidiary of IBM. IBM is open source friendly, but the days of RH being an "all open source company" ended in July 2019.
  - bonzini 6y ago
    Red Hat is still all open source, its owner isn't.
jcrites 6y ago
Amazon Linux 2 could be a viable alternative. In addition to being available to run on AWS, it's also available as a container image and in various machine image formats: https://aws.amazon.com/amazon-linux-2/#Resources https://aws.amazon.com/amazon-linux-2/#Resources AL has had enough work put into it over the years that, while it may have been inspired by CentOS/RHEL originally, calling it a rebadged CentOS is not accurate these days. A full and competent team maintains it. While it's clearly made similar architectural choices, those are also for compatibility reasons. However I doubt that support is available for anyone not running it on AWS, at least not from AWS -- but then again folks running CentOS weren't paying for support from RHEL either. I also wonder if the announcement is as bad as people make it sound. I'm not an expert in Linux distros, but my understanding is that AL2 also uses a streams-like model, in that it provides long term support (patches for existing software) while also making new software available. My understanding was that, while it is inevitably versioned by making artifacts like VMs and containers available over CDNs ( https://cdn.amazonlinux.com/os-images/2.0.20201111.0/ https://cdn.amazonlinux.com/os-images/2.0.20201111.0/ ), the expectation is that most users will always launch the latest version, relying on its backward compatibility. Perhaps someone who knows more about the specifics of its release model could comment.
- symlinkk 6y ago
  I’d like to use Amazon Linux but it doesn’t seem like they provide ISOs. Seems like it’s intended to be used largely on EC2.
  - notabee 6y ago
    We had some folks try installing Amazon Linux images in our network. They spammed the network looking for a nonexistent link local metadata service, which is how we found out about them.
  - mastre_ 6y ago
    Don't forget that AL also runs on Amazon's A1 ARM instances.
    - 6y ago
fogihujy 6y ago
I've heard the idea being mentioned from several sources. My guess is that unless Oracle does some kind of magic an manages to get anyone to trust them, then we'll see a new community project to replace CentOS very soon. Either that, or Debian's user-base will grow a lot within the next few months. :)

by apecat 6y ago

posix_me_less 6y ago

That would be cool "stick it to the man" trick, but how do we organize?

apecat 6y ago
Well, GoDaddy, or heh, AWS are The Man. My best hope is that the major hosting vendors, or maybe some industry consortium might offer resources for this.
- syshum 6y ago
  AWS already has their on RHEL Clone, Amazon Linux, for use on AWS
- apecat 6y ago
  @syshum, yes, but it's not exacly RHEL, and it's not distributed outside AWS https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25347232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25347232 But the point is indeed that there are resources and infrastructure, so one might be hopeful that there will be a good outcome. One possible outcome would be increased demand and resources for Debian and/or Ubuntu and I definitely wouldn't mind that (five years of support isn't all that much in IT). Realistically though, a lot of people need RHEL for free and I suspect there will be a way.
  - posix_me_less 6y ago
    Yeah, resources and infrastrucure are not some magic that only Redhat can provide. If sources will be released on https://git.centos.org/ https://git.centos.org/ or somewhere else, then it may work. Just like the old times [1] [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/128952/ https://lwn.net/Articles/128952/
  - InvaderFizz 6y ago
    > @syshum, yes, but it's not exacly RHEL, and it's not distributed outside AWS On the first point you are correct. It's not exactly RHEL7. On the second point, Amazon provides images for running on prem[0]. We run a lot of dev AmazonLinux2 VMs on prem so that the local computing environment matches the deployed EC2 environment. 0: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/amazon-linux-2-virtual-machine.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/amazon-l...
    - apecat 6y ago
      @invaderFizz: oh, this is useful to me, thanks!
rbowen 6y ago
Not only does this not "stick it to the man", it's directly addressed in the FAQ. If folks want to boot up another rebuild project, there's nothing preventing that. There are also several existing ones that you could go join.
- thayne 6y ago
  CentOS started out as just such a project...

zxspectrum1982 6y ago

That already exists and is called CloudLinux. It is very cheap but not free. Other RHEL-clones: Oracle Linux (best one), Springdale Linux. Other alternatives: openSUSE Leap and Debian. I am not even listing Ubuntu because I hate it since snaps.

apecat 6y ago
Oh cool. As for CloudLinux, "not free" probably scale for some hosting environments, including non-managed cloud instances. But something like Springdale, given resources, might be able to provide. They're still tracking RHEL 7, though. Debian and Ubuntu, which offer five years of Long Term Support are the next best thing available, and that's already kind of tight for long-term deployments of self-hosted, old-fashioned business software. Debian is particularly impressive, since they, on paper, aim to support all packages with security fixes, whereas Ubuntu's main repo is a lot more limited. OpenSUSE Leap versions seem to get three years, which really isn't enough software that needs to just work for a long while.
- zxspectrum1982 6y ago
  Springdale Linux is on RHEL 8.3 but their homepage is awfully out of date. Here's the full ISO for 8.1: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.1/x86_64/iso/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.1/x86_64/iso/ And then you can add the repos to update to 8.3: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/ Or you can take the small ("boot") ISO and install 8.3 directy: http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/x86_64/os/images/ http://puias.princeton.edu/data/puias/8.3/x86_64/os/images/ In fact, they are even building Springdale Linux 8 for i386, which RHEL and CentOS never did. If you need more than three years on openSUSE Leap, then you need to upgrade to SUSE Linux Enterprise Server.
- Thaxll 6y ago
  I trust Canonical more than Debian for security fixes. Canonical has a dedicated security team.
  - 6y ago

voxadam 6y ago

FAQ: CentOS Stream Updates @ Red Hat[0] Q: What does this mean for users of CentOS Linux? The creation of CentOS Stream provides a new mechanism for partners and community members to add innovation to the next version of RHEL as it’s being built instead of after it’s built. We also recognize that there are different kinds of CentOS Linux users, and we are working with the CentOS Project Governing Board to tailor programs that meet the needs of different user groups. In the first half of 2021, we will be introducing low- or no-cost programs for a variety of use cases, including options for open source projects and communities, partner ecosystems and an expansion of the use cases of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux Developer subscription to better serve the needs of systems administrators and partner developers. We’ll share more details on these initiatives as they become available. For those converting to RHEL, there is guidance available today for converting from CentOS Linux to RHEL. [0] https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q10 https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/faq-centos-stream-updates#Q10

em500 6y ago
LOL at the corporate guff. The primary use case of CentOS is "I want to run RHEL without paying anyone anything". The best way to "serve that need"? Don't kill off CentOS 8.3+.
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  Actually the best way is to allow free use of RHEL for those who don't want to pay for it.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
    I mean, that's de-facto what CentOS was; RHEL but non-paid and with different branding. But I mean... they were built from the (exact) same sources, so similar that you could convert between them by un/installing a few packages.
    - vbezhenar 6y ago
      The difference is that CentOS is really free. RHEL free will be whatever RedHat wants. Of course it won't be as free as CentOS. But if it'll be free enough to satisfy most CentOS users, that might be good enough.

vbezhenar 6y ago

> Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? I think that's a gray area. For example RHEL has some support branches where they'll produce security updates for minor updates. For example you can pay a lot of money and you'll get RHEL 7.2 with security updates. They won't release sources for those packages unless you'll ask for those packages (you, as a paid client, not you as nobody in the Internet). But if you'll ask sources and then publish those sources in the internet again and again, so other entity like CentOS or whatever could pick them up and build CentOS 7.2 LTS, they will terminate your contract. So that's a weakness in GPL. You won't break any law, but they'll just terminate contracts with those who publish those sources. So those sources are effectively unavailable for a large public. Currently they publish their mainstream branch sources to the public. But they could stop doing that any time and only provide those sources to their clients on request.

ossusermivami 6y ago
I'll be uninstalling my fedora laptop if they do this!
- enz 6y ago
  Why?
  - ossusermivami 6y ago
    because everything red hat is pissing me off right know maybe get better in the future.
wang_li 6y ago
> They won't release sources for those packages unless you'll ask for those packages (you, as a paid client, not you as nobody in the Internet). If the code in question is licensed under the GPL and Red Hat isn't the owner of the code, then I as a rando on the Internet can ask them for the source and if they don't provide it, the person who does own the code can sue them and revoke their license to distribute said code. And I'd say that the majority of code in RHEL is not owned by Red Hat.

bayindirh 6y ago

There's a silent but relatively big user base of CentOS in HPC and scientific computing. ScientificLinux and CentOS rules all HPC clusters. Clusters are like enterprise servers. Big, monolithic, rarely upgraded. They're upgraded in one big-fell swoop and left to run. There'll be another clone of RHEL since HPC can't accept CentOS Stream as the alternative. The whole infra is too big to move to Debian too. So with today's announcement, a new distro is born. Also Greg (CentOS' founder's) domain (HPCng) is very telling... We'll see. We're in for a hell of a ride. If you excuse me, I need to dust-off my XCAT servers...

chasil 6y ago
Oracle already has a clone that performs an in-place conversion of an installed CentOS 7 system. There is a page describing the conversion: https://linux.oracle.com/switch/centos/ https://linux.oracle.com/switch/centos/ They have a shell script to convert a CentOS install to Oracle Linux, so you can buy support if you want. The converter only works with versions 5, 6, and 7. It does not work with CentOS 8. It would be nice if that could get updated.
- IntelMiner 6y ago
  I don't think many people who want to use something stable like CentOS, but don't want to pay for a RHEL support contract would want to pay Oracle for RHEL-but-with-Oracle-sprinkles-on-top
  - kbenson 6y ago
    Not to mention Oracle is not known to leave money on the table, and if they see they can start charging for Oracle Linux because there's no large well known free version, I wouldn't put it past them. Put another way, if you jump ship from CentOS because IBM caused Red Hat to change it into a funnel to pay them money, if you landed on Oracle, you might be setting yourself up to do it all over again fairly soon.
    - blaser-waffle 6y ago

mattdm 6y ago

> Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? Whether or not Red Hat "has to", Red Hat is an all open source company and does and will.

toxic 6y ago
Redhat is a fully-owned subsidiary of IBM. IBM is open source friendly, but the days of RH being an "all open source company" ended in July 2019.
- bonzini 6y ago
  Red Hat is still all open source, its owner isn't.

jcrites 6y ago

Amazon Linux 2 could be a viable alternative. In addition to being available to run on AWS, it's also available as a container image and in various machine image formats: https://aws.amazon.com/amazon-linux-2/#Resources https://aws.amazon.com/amazon-linux-2/#Resources AL has had enough work put into it over the years that, while it may have been inspired by CentOS/RHEL originally, calling it a rebadged CentOS is not accurate these days. A full and competent team maintains it. While it's clearly made similar architectural choices, those are also for compatibility reasons. However I doubt that support is available for anyone not running it on AWS, at least not from AWS -- but then again folks running CentOS weren't paying for support from RHEL either. I also wonder if the announcement is as bad as people make it sound. I'm not an expert in Linux distros, but my understanding is that AL2 also uses a streams-like model, in that it provides long term support (patches for existing software) while also making new software available. My understanding was that, while it is inevitably versioned by making artifacts like VMs and containers available over CDNs ( https://cdn.amazonlinux.com/os-images/2.0.20201111.0/ https://cdn.amazonlinux.com/os-images/2.0.20201111.0/ ), the expectation is that most users will always launch the latest version, relying on its backward compatibility. Perhaps someone who knows more about the specifics of its release model could comment.

symlinkk 6y ago
I’d like to use Amazon Linux but it doesn’t seem like they provide ISOs. Seems like it’s intended to be used largely on EC2.
- notabee 6y ago
  We had some folks try installing Amazon Linux images in our network. They spammed the network looking for a nonexistent link local metadata service, which is how we found out about them.
- mastre_ 6y ago
  Don't forget that AL also runs on Amazon's A1 ARM instances.
  - 6y ago

fogihujy 6y ago

I've heard the idea being mentioned from several sources. My guess is that unless Oracle does some kind of magic an manages to get anyone to trust them, then we'll see a new community project to replace CentOS very soon. Either that, or Debian's user-base will grow a lot within the next few months. :)