5 ms·

First of all, I used to be a Fedora user. The experience most of the time was excellent. Updating was a breeze and via external repos most packages were readily

First of all, I used to be a Fedora user. The experience most of the time was excellent. Updating was a breeze and via external repos most packages were readily available. Most desktops/spins are well supported like sway, i3, xfce. Nowadays I use Arch which I also think it's a great distro. The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Also, since CentOS was shut down, Fedora is a good way to learn how Red Hat based distros internals work.

silverfox17 5y ago
CentOS wasn't "shut down"... it's still out there, just as CentOS Stream now. The changes for most users are minimal to not even noticeable.
- smarx007 5y ago
  And there is Rocky Linux for the rest.
  - ollien 5y ago
    I've heard great things about Alma
- JohnTHaller 5y ago
  CentOS Linux is end of life at the end of this year, so in that respect, it was shut down: https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ CentOS Stream isn't geared towards production environments according to the CentOS website.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
  CentOS most certainly was shut down, and replaced with CentOS Stream, which is a similar product that went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Close enough for many uses, but not the same thing.
  - mroche 5y ago
    > went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Please review the following resources before making statements about RHEL ABI compatibility in Stream: --- RHEL ABI: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility RHEL Kernel ABI: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 Kernel Sources (Module.kabi_<arch>): - RHEL 9: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel - RHEL 8: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/blob/c8s/f/SOURCES Pat Riehecky - Thinking About Binary Compatibility and CentOS Stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 --- As a future version of RHEL, CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. I'll say it again: CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. All packages that exist in Stream repos have passed the same internal gating test suites that RHEL has. I'm sorry if this comes off as rough but it is very annoying seeing this "ABI incompatibility" statement be thrown around constantly without people fully understanding what it actually means in the context of RHEL. It is _not_ an all-encompassing policy that applies to the every part of the distribution the same like it would be implied for a library strictly following semver. There are levels and nuance, and some packages don't even make the list (which is why there are packages without a -devel subpackage). It is okay to say that Stream may not be bug-for-bug identical to released versions of RHEL, but it will be ABI compatible.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
      I was thinking specifically in the context of ZFS, which break on minor releases because kernel-internal symbols are not fully stable (unless I've seriously misunderstood https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320). And since Stream is a rolling release, users will therefore experience breakage unless they specifically pin their kernel version (or possibly use DKMS). That's ABI breakage, and RH explicitly saying that it doesn't count doesn't stop it breaking stuff that would work in a non-rolling release.
      - 5y ago
dralley 5y ago
> The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Delta RPMs just aren't worth the pain. They were a nice idea at the time but the utility of them has not kept up with the cost of supporting them.

silverfox17 5y ago

CentOS wasn't "shut down"... it's still out there, just as CentOS Stream now. The changes for most users are minimal to not even noticeable.

smarx007 5y ago
And there is Rocky Linux for the rest.
- ollien 5y ago
  I've heard great things about Alma
JohnTHaller 5y ago
CentOS Linux is end of life at the end of this year, so in that respect, it was shut down: https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ https://www.centos.org/cl-vs-cs/ CentOS Stream isn't geared towards production environments according to the CentOS website.
yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
CentOS most certainly was shut down, and replaced with CentOS Stream, which is a similar product that went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Close enough for many uses, but not the same thing.
- mroche 5y ago
  > went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Please review the following resources before making statements about RHEL ABI compatibility in Stream: --- RHEL ABI: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility RHEL Kernel ABI: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773 Kernel Sources (Module.kabi_<arch>): - RHEL 9: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/kernel - RHEL 8: https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/blob/c8s/f/SOURCES Pat Riehecky - Thinking About Binary Compatibility and CentOS Stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0 --- As a future version of RHEL, CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. I'll say it again: CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist. All packages that exist in Stream repos have passed the same internal gating test suites that RHEL has. I'm sorry if this comes off as rough but it is very annoying seeing this "ABI incompatibility" statement be thrown around constantly without people fully understanding what it actually means in the context of RHEL. It is _not_ an all-encompassing policy that applies to the every part of the distribution the same like it would be implied for a library strictly following semver. There are levels and nuance, and some packages don't even make the list (which is why there are packages without a -devel subpackage). It is okay to say that Stream may not be bug-for-bug identical to released versions of RHEL, but it will be ABI compatible.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    I was thinking specifically in the context of ZFS, which break on minor releases because kernel-internal symbols are not fully stable (unless I've seriously misunderstood https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320). And since Stream is a rolling release, users will therefore experience breakage unless they specifically pin their kernel version (or possibly use DKMS). That's ABI breakage, and RH explicitly saying that it doesn't count doesn't stop it breaking stuff that would work in a non-rolling release.
    - 5y ago

dralley 5y ago

> The only thing I miss are delta RPMs. Delta RPMs just aren't worth the pain. They were a nice idea at the time but the utility of them has not kept up with the cost of supporting them.