8 ms·
What's new in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- clintonwoo 4y agoLooks like a cool release. Note there is a typo on the page saying Nodejs 6 when I believe they are really using Nodejs 16.. Nodejs 6 would be horribly out of date for a new release!
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hn_version_0023 4y agoAre you sure thats a typo? Being ten revs behind seems like a very common RHEL practice.
- nophunphil 4y agoFair reasoning, but it’s a typo. The new features listed on the RH site correspond to Node 16. Release notes: https://nodejs.org/ko/blog/release/v16.0.0/ https://nodejs.org/ko/blog/release/v16.0.0/
- languageserver 4y agoI don't get this. They upgraded some software versions? What is the deal here, you can just use conda or containers or compile yourself and add to a PATH env var. What is this, the 90's? What am I missing
- ranger_danger 4y agoWhy use any linux distro ever when you can make your own? /s
- joelthelion 4y agoThey promise that it will work well together and will provide support if it doesn't. That's a big deal when you run a big business.
- brightball 4y agoI'm curious to see how many companies on here use RedHat for their server infrastructure? What are the benefits and costs?
- rubyist5eva 4y agoUntil we moved serverless, we did - business folks wanted someone to blame when sh*t hit the fan, so they felt it was worth it. As a developer, I love working with it. But now nearly everything we deploy is on AWS Fargate and our images are Debian based.
- saralily 4y agoJust curious: why did you switch to Debian, especially with RHEL being more or less free for containers?
- rubyist5eva 4y agoA lot of the base images we ended up using are Debian so we just wanted to be consistent, whereas before we were running software from the RHEL repositories.
- chucksta 4y agoThe benefit is support and access to their support pages, you can also make general administration easier through some of their tools. But it's pretty expensive
- csdreamer7 4y agoWhat tools? Cockpit?
- SoftTalker 4y agoThat's why we dropped it. It just got to be too expensive. Yes you got access to their support knowledge base, which was sometimes helpful but if you did a little work you could almost always find the answers elsewhere. The main thing I liked about RHEL was its stability. Not a lot of churn, and for running any other vended software, support for RHEL was never a question. Converted everything to CentOS. When Red Hat killed that distro, that was a bridge-burning event. We use Ubuntu now.
- tempnow987 4y agoPrior to going to cloud (ubuntu ended up being easier there even over paid RHEL) on-prem a lot of businesses are just structured around having a vendor, which basically means someone to call to both figure out what to use (unfortunately often dealing with sales folks) and then when issues come up (support / implementation consulting etc). Given margins are often so good on subscription models in a redhat type world, I really wish they had gone a bit heavier on cloud focus (AWS / GCP / Windows in my case). Some free / base images container / vm focused pushed hard for everything from docker to cloud. I thought ubuntu executed very well here (given their commercialization has always felt somewhat weak). They got images for docker / aws / gcp all first class and available at the basic level. They are also doing some deals with Microsoft and Windows Subsystem for Linux. Not sure if anyone has done the docker image download weighted by base distribution analysis, but my own experience went from the centos / rhel was like everywhere to ubuntu and amazon's linux stuff.
- Kaytaro 4y agoBase images were a part of this release, and their developer subscription is free. Not sure if that applies to the various public clouds though. Red Hat's thing is hybrid cloud and being cloud agnostic. Amazon Linux locks you in to AWS (and by the way it's literally just a clone of RHEL) and Canonical is too sketchy for some enterprise customers. Also RH is focused on Podman over Docker, being the developers of it.
- tempnow987 4y agoRight, and I think they missed some major opportunities as a result. Would be great to have an offering as the basic base image for docker containers (outside of UBI). They let Project Atomic die. Then they let CoreOS Container Linux die I think? They have a Fedore CoreOS but don't seem to promote it at all and I can't find images on docker hub for it. The RedHat stuff is generally paywalled. CentOS is gone. I know they are pitching the IBM cloud - I don't care about the IBM cloud - though they keep on advertising Watson to me as the solution to every issue. The OpenShift brand was hurt by the enormous mess of complexity it was compared to K8 and things like ECS and Fargate etc.
- boomboomsubban 4y agoCould anyone tell me why Red Hat intentionally uses non-LTS kernels? I can understand why they didn't go with the last super LTS 5.10, but why go for 5.14 over the still supported 5.15? Sure it wouldn't matter in a year but that's still a year of support.
- linuxorbust 4y agoStability. The kernels contain tons of backported goodies and bug fixes. RHEL users dislike change. We use Debian where I work, and it's stable, but not as stable as RHEL. When it absolutely needs to be rock solid, RHEL. I've used Red Hat since 1998. Fedora for personal use. You'll find some people using Debian Stable for some important things, but with Red Hat paid support, you can get help with seriously intractable problems. With Debian, there is no paid support except for third parties. Loads of corporations like having a throat to choke when the SHTF. Forgot to mention that tons of hosting companies using Red Hat/CentOS/variations of RHEL use cPanel. It doesn't run on anything else.
- mistrial9 4y agomid-skill level admin here, mostly linux. I put up a Debian server on racked hardware for a consulting client, did almost nothing else but check on it from time to time.. uptime was past 800 days when I took it down (?) .. not one reboot. I updated the openssl and related, that was about it. AMD64
- sigg3 4y agoI only recently learned to use RHEL (did the RHCSA) and from before I've used debian and Slackware. RHEL is really polished, more so than the competition. I asked around why more people aren't using RHEL in Scandinavia, and the reply I got was that it was mostly cultural. In Europe it's Debian or SUSE, and in the states it's RHEL. I don't have a preference (but Slackware is awesome).
- Saint_Genet 4y ago
- pm2222 4y ago> Python 3.9 gets lifetime support in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 Wonderful.
- _wldu 4y agoDoes anyone know if Red Hat enabled landlock in this release? The kernel supports it since 5.13 and they are running 5.14. The kernel config should look something like this: CONFIG_SECURITY_LANDLOCK=y CONFIG_LSM="landlock,lockdown,yama,..."
- statquontrarian 4y ago> now supports kernel live patching Never heard of this before. Looks like it's called kpatch: https://github.com/dynup/kpatch https://github.com/dynup/kpatch
- e12e 4y agoOracle snagged (developed) the first (for Linux) ksplice; https://ksplice.oracle.com/ https://ksplice.oracle.com/ canonical pay walled the second (free for "personal" use): https://ubuntu.com/security/livepatch https://ubuntu.com/security/livepatch Kpatch was/is the open, not-patent encumbered version (IIRC) - i thought RedHat had offered some version for years? Ed: Only rarely touch RedHat for the past few years - and generally prefer "know that system boots correctly after (kernel) updates" to "its running new (presumably secure) kernel, but might not boot if power fails". It's a trade-off - but rarely do I need kernel live patching. Services probably need a restart due to new SSL library anyway...
- spicyusername 4y agoI'd love to see a Red Hat CoreOS outside the context of OpenShift at some point. Seeing a proliferation of container-first, immutable, and atomic distributions like Fedora CoreOS would be a good middle ground between bare-metal and Kubernetes. All of my Fedora CoreOS hosts automagically upgrade themselves via rpm-ostree and Zincati, and the fact that the OS is atomic and disconnected from the containers I'm running on top of it gives me a lot of peace of mind in terms of stability.
- wolverine876 4y agoWhat is the status of Rocky Linux?
- MangoCoffee 4y agoit look like a lot of people here doesn't understand RedHat's business. when billions is on the line, companies doesn't want you to google/stackoverflow for days. they want the problem solved in hours. that's where RedHat come in. its like auto insurance, you are paying for nothing until a fatal crash happened.
- alexjplant 4y agoA few years back during a work lunch I spoke about installing Red Hat 9 from CD on my 350Mhz Pentium II with 64 MB of RAM. A 20-year-old sysadmin interrupted me to say how that wasn't possible as "they're only on Red Hat 7 right now". Explaining how Fedora and RHEL came to be from the original Red Hat made me feel old :-P. Now we've come full circle. EDIT: At the risk of sounding like "that guy" I'd like to clarify that I don't fault my former colleague for what he said; for nearly 20 years "Red Hat" has been colloquially synonymous with RHEL (vice CentOS and Fedora) and I merely thought this was an amusing anecdote.
- josephcsible 4y agoThere's a ton of bad changes in RHEL 9 too, which obviously weren't mentioned here, but were in the long-form release notes that most people don't read all of. Here's some of them: * No more KVM virtualization on IBM POWER (e.g., Raptor's Talos and Blackbird systems) * SPICE is removed in favor of VNC, even though VNC doesn't yet support a bunch of SPICE's functionality, such as audio, smart card sharing, and USB redirection * No more taking snapshots of VMs * virt-manager is removed in favor of a new Web console, even though it doesn't have all of the features of virt-manager yet * SSHFS is gone (it's in EPEL now, but a lot of places have ridiculous rules that only official RHEL packages are allowed)
- csdreamer7 4y ago> * virt-manager is removed in favor of a new Web console, even though it doesn't have all of the features of virt-manager yet Are you sure about that it was 'removed'? I have CentOS Stream 9 installed and virt-manager shows as a CentOS package (not epel). CS9 is not RHEL 9 but I believe virt-manager's support was depreciated.
- josephcsible 4y agoOops, I did indeed mix up deprecated with removed.