4 ms·

> Upgrading [...] from a release candidate to a stable release will not be supported Why does this distro make it hard for people to use it?

post-factum 5y ago
"…meaning it will not be tested nor documented." Likely, you'll still be able to do it.
- chousuke 5y ago
  You will. Considering how easy it is to convert between distros with DNF (I've often wished APT had distro-sync) I'd be surprised if there were any real issues upgrading; it's most likely just left to the user's expertise to fix things should any issues arise.
  - viraptor 5y ago
    It's easy to convert between distros based on RH. The package manager is coincidental. You wouldn't have as smooth conversion between SL, Fedora, and Suse for example.
    - chousuke 5y ago
      I wouldn't say the package manager is entirely coincidental; distro-sync and transaction support makes it easier than it would be if you did the equivalent operation using APT. I'm pretty sure I could convert RHEL into Fedora and vice versa (probably not Suse though, it's too different), but I admit it's not going to be as easy as switching between EL distros.
  - tgmux 5y ago
    Exactly this. No reason to think it shouldn't work, but probably a better use of folks' time doing something else than trying to troubleshoot this very corner case.
robert_foss 5y ago
I'd say this is pretty fair considering that a fair amount of serious issues can be expected for the first ever release of a distro.
- pantalaimon 5y ago
  But isn't this just Red Hat with the name changed?
  - cpach 5y ago
    Kinda sorta yeah. But I guess the Rocky project still needs to set up their own build servers, CI/CD, package repositories and that kinda stuff.
- mekster 5y ago
  And yet, ironically people like it better than CentOS stream? People are making such a big fuss about CentOS getting slightly closer to Fedora.
  - fragbait65 5y ago
    That's not what this is about. The scientific community cannot run a distribution with "unneeded" updates to libraries. That goes for other organizations as well.
    - mekster 5y ago
      That's for those who can't pay for RHEL subscriptions and they have such critical experiments going on that getting updates earlier than RedHat screws them up? They can surely opt out of updating automatically and only apply updates after reading the changelogs.
      - jabl 5y ago
        In many cases systems run out-of-tree drivers like Lustre, MOFED, NVIDIA etc. that tend to break due to kernel internal API changes. Yes, also for changes incorporated into minor RHEL releases like X.Y -> X.(Y+1), though not for kernel security updates within a minor X.Y release. At the same time they might need to keep up to date wrt security updates. So if CentOS stream implies that the kernel will randomly get an API-breaking update, with no security support for the previous version, that is not workable.
maxnoe 5y ago
Please cut them some slack for this. It is not like this is the rc for the next version of a long running distribution. It is the first ever release using a from scratch implemented build infrastructure.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  People have been treating Rocky as a done deal, a ready to go CentOS replacement for months. It will be very soon, hopefully, but the developers haven’t claimed to ready. Using Rocky Linux as a basis for a long term production system is still a few months or perhaps a year into the future, and people need to let the team get everything in place before complaing that they can’t seemlessly move from one free OS to another.

post-factum 5y ago

"…meaning it will not be tested nor documented." Likely, you'll still be able to do it.

chousuke 5y ago
You will. Considering how easy it is to convert between distros with DNF (I've often wished APT had distro-sync) I'd be surprised if there were any real issues upgrading; it's most likely just left to the user's expertise to fix things should any issues arise.
- viraptor 5y ago
  It's easy to convert between distros based on RH. The package manager is coincidental. You wouldn't have as smooth conversion between SL, Fedora, and Suse for example.
  - chousuke 5y ago
    I wouldn't say the package manager is entirely coincidental; distro-sync and transaction support makes it easier than it would be if you did the equivalent operation using APT. I'm pretty sure I could convert RHEL into Fedora and vice versa (probably not Suse though, it's too different), but I admit it's not going to be as easy as switching between EL distros.
- tgmux 5y ago
  Exactly this. No reason to think it shouldn't work, but probably a better use of folks' time doing something else than trying to troubleshoot this very corner case.

robert_foss 5y ago

I'd say this is pretty fair considering that a fair amount of serious issues can be expected for the first ever release of a distro.

pantalaimon 5y ago
But isn't this just Red Hat with the name changed?
- cpach 5y ago
  Kinda sorta yeah. But I guess the Rocky project still needs to set up their own build servers, CI/CD, package repositories and that kinda stuff.
mekster 5y ago
And yet, ironically people like it better than CentOS stream? People are making such a big fuss about CentOS getting slightly closer to Fedora.
- fragbait65 5y ago
  That's not what this is about. The scientific community cannot run a distribution with "unneeded" updates to libraries. That goes for other organizations as well.
  - mekster 5y ago
    That's for those who can't pay for RHEL subscriptions and they have such critical experiments going on that getting updates earlier than RedHat screws them up? They can surely opt out of updating automatically and only apply updates after reading the changelogs.
    - jabl 5y ago
      In many cases systems run out-of-tree drivers like Lustre, MOFED, NVIDIA etc. that tend to break due to kernel internal API changes. Yes, also for changes incorporated into minor RHEL releases like X.Y -> X.(Y+1), though not for kernel security updates within a minor X.Y release. At the same time they might need to keep up to date wrt security updates. So if CentOS stream implies that the kernel will randomly get an API-breaking update, with no security support for the previous version, that is not workable.

maxnoe 5y ago

Please cut them some slack for this. It is not like this is the rc for the next version of a long running distribution. It is the first ever release using a from scratch implemented build infrastructure.

mrweasel 5y ago
People have been treating Rocky as a done deal, a ready to go CentOS replacement for months. It will be very soon, hopefully, but the developers haven’t claimed to ready. Using Rocky Linux as a basis for a long term production system is still a few months or perhaps a year into the future, and people need to let the team get everything in place before complaing that they can’t seemlessly move from one free OS to another.