4 ms·

Why is everyone missing the obvious replacement: Oracle Linux It is superior to CentOS in a lot of ways: - A lot less delay releasing (rebuilding) RHEL update

Why is everyone missing the obvious replacement: Oracle Linux It is superior to CentOS in a lot of ways: - A lot less delay releasing (rebuilding) RHEL updates compared with CentOS (specially important for security updates) - Free to use and distribute like CentOS - You have access to optional support - You can install UEK that has BTRFS and a unlocks a whole new kernel generation to RHEL base It was better than CentOS for years. You can switch from CentOS with a script that updates your repos and that's it. And second: CentOS Stream is not that bad ideia. Why way to long for fixes/updates? It is and will continue to be slow, just not super-slow.

viraptor 6y ago
I don't think anyone is missing that one. Many people just don't want to trust Oracle in this case - if CentOS can pull the rug from under them, Oracle will likely do at some point too. > CentOS Stream is not that bad ideia. It may not be for your usecase, but lots of CentOS users wanted to be on one version for years and not have to care about it. They're not waiting for updates - they don't want any updates in the first place. (As long as security fixes get included)
- gbraad 6y ago
  And staying on a version with CS is not possible? No one forces you to update.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    Stream is a rolling release. As far as I understand it, you can't say "update, but only critical fixes within a release". If they update a major version of something, your options are: update it, or stop receiving fixes for it. You won't be able to both get those fixes and not do major version updates. Kind of like Fedora rawhide, but more stable.
schoolornot 6y ago
Isn’t Oracle based on RedHat sources? A few years ago I believe RH stopped releasing individual changesets on kernel patches to make life hard for Oracle and Amazon. What’s stopping RH from doing more extreme things like hiding SRPM metadata and other obfuscation around packaging?
pacamara619 6y ago
I wouldn't touch anything that's even remotely tied to Oracle with a 10ft pole.

viraptor 6y ago

I don't think anyone is missing that one. Many people just don't want to trust Oracle in this case - if CentOS can pull the rug from under them, Oracle will likely do at some point too. > CentOS Stream is not that bad ideia. It may not be for your usecase, but lots of CentOS users wanted to be on one version for years and not have to care about it. They're not waiting for updates - they don't want any updates in the first place. (As long as security fixes get included)

gbraad 6y ago
And staying on a version with CS is not possible? No one forces you to update.
- viraptor 6y ago
  Stream is a rolling release. As far as I understand it, you can't say "update, but only critical fixes within a release". If they update a major version of something, your options are: update it, or stop receiving fixes for it. You won't be able to both get those fixes and not do major version updates. Kind of like Fedora rawhide, but more stable.

schoolornot 6y ago

Isn’t Oracle based on RedHat sources? A few years ago I believe RH stopped releasing individual changesets on kernel patches to make life hard for Oracle and Amazon. What’s stopping RH from doing more extreme things like hiding SRPM metadata and other obfuscation around packaging?

pacamara619 6y ago

I wouldn't touch anything that's even remotely tied to Oracle with a 10ft pole.