8 ms·

> He seems to be pissed off that Red Hat discontinued the free CentOS distribution. Just to clarify, CentOS is not discontinued. Basically all that is disconti

> He seems to be pissed off that Red Hat discontinued the free CentOS distribution. Just to clarify, CentOS is not discontinued. Basically all that is discontinued is CentOS "point" releases. There is CentOS stream 9, it gets updates, there will be CentOS stream 10, it will get updates, there will be overlap between CentOS stream 9 and 10 being supported. Sure the CentOS stream won't be exactly equivalent to RHEL point releases, CentOS stream 9 won't be RHEL 9.1 - but RHEL 9.1 will be cut from CentOS stream 9 AFAIU.

sekh60 4y ago
And to further add, a lot of the major Red Hat backed projects switched to using Centos steam as the officially supported redhat lineage. Ceph and OpenStack Kolla are both good, major examples.
- treffer 4y ago
  Which are in large parts RH/IBM open source projects, too
  - KingOfCoders 4y ago
    "lot of the major Red Hat backed projects switched to using Centos" "Which are in large parts RH/IBM open source projects, too" ?
- infinet 4y ago
  CERN was a big user of CentOS. After redhat changed CentOS8 EOL, CERN was allowed to use RHEL. Last time I checked, they suggested others in high energy physics community to use Rocky or Alma if RHEL is not an option.
  - dralley 4y ago
    CERN is backing CentOS Stream https://mobile.twitter.com/passthejoe/status/1446931447118372867 https://mobile.twitter.com/passthejoe/status/144693144711837...
  - infinet 4y ago
    Well, I checked again. From CERN Oct 28, 2022 Linux Future Committee meeting [1]: - Several bugs have been encountered in Stream, which were not present in RHEL. - Some user communities had previously expressed concerns on the feasibility of using Stream in a production setting. This feeling has also recently been expressed internally by some IT groups. - CERN is evaluating our original recommendation [0] of utilising CentOS Stream as the default Linux Operating System. [0] https://linux.web.cern.ch/#update-on-centos-linux-strategy https://linux.web.cern.ch/#update-on-centos-linux-strategy [1] https://indico.cern.ch/category/13390/ https://indico.cern.ch/category/13390/
simonh 4y ago
Something still exists that is called CentOS, but as an upstream to rather than a downstream from RH, it’s not equivalent or even similar to what CentOS used to be.
- flanked-evergl 4y ago
  To me it is not that critical what the specific organizational structure is that relates to CentOS Stream and it's relation to RHEL. What matters more is how it affects me as someone using it. CentOS was never RHEL, it was though very close, CentOS Stream is also very close. Whenever I used RHEL or CentOS before CentOS Stream I always updated to the latest versions of packages for the major release version, if I use CentOS stream I will still get updates to the latest versions of packages for the major release version. Maybe I get them a bit earlier than RHEL, but this to me is somewhat irrelevant. If I want reproducibility there are still plenty of ways to get it, including RHEL UBI.
  - type0 4y ago
    > CentOS was never RHEL, it was though very close, CentOS Stream is also very close. It was close enough, Stream is almost as close and for some people it isn't close enough when they need bit for bit compatibility for the software they are going to run
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    UBI is fine for deployment. But in a shop where development workstations are all rhel, it was nice to know that the package versions available for 7.9 matched for both rhel and centos. It isn't that centos stream has no value, its just it isn't the same value. Now rocky is. Our business already made the switch for anything it was using centos for.
- mekster 4y ago
  What is such a big difference as not to keep using it? You seem to believe a community supported distro was as good as a corporate supported distro and put such a high faith in it but now somehow it's all corrupt when RH supports it putting it as an upstream? If your usage is that critical, why not buy RHEL (or Ubuntu extended support) for 10 years support and stop freaking out like your Linux days have come to an end?
jwitthuhn 4y ago
Stream is inherently less well-tested than the normal stable releases. I'm not aware of any specific bugs that have come up in it, but it get updates before red hat is willing to push those updates to people who have a support contract. Stream also notably has a much shorter lifecycle, with support for 8 Stream ending in 2024, compared to 2029 for rhel/rocky/alma. To me the main value of using rhel-based distros is the great reliability and long support life. Stream compromises on both of those compared to what normal centos offered, and rocky and alma currently offer.
- christophilus 4y ago
  I don't think Stream compromises in any significant way on reliability. They test it rigorously. The short support window is a bit of a bummer, though. That said, I'm running CentOS Stream 9 right now. It's supported until 2027. I generally like to keep my operating systems relatively up to date, so a roughly 5 year support window is adequate for me.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mekster 4y ago
    5 years sounds good enough. Ubuntu does that too with LTS unless you go extended 10 years support. People freaking out because their free candy is no longer as tasty as one could hope, it looks quite funny they have zero willingness to pay for such a long support effort.
- drewlander 4y ago
  The shorter lifecycle is only for 8. CentOS Stream 9 is EOL the same time as RHEL 9 full support page (unless I am reading it wrong) https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/
  - j33zusjuice 4y ago
    You are. The charts are confusing. At the bottom it says full support ends May 31, 2027. Red Hat made some strange decisions with the way they’re handling Stream vs RHEL, plus the communication was abysmal, and they changed models mid-cycle. Be mad at them for that all you want, the rest was overblown. This company could have just used Stream 9 if he wanted a free OS. Since he’s virtualizing, he could have bought hypervisor licenses for $4k a piece that allow you to run as many VMs as your hypervisor can handle. He could have used OpenShift for virtualization and container orchestration, and just paid for the OpenShift licensing. If you use OpenShift, you can run all the RHEL VMs and UBIs you’d like at no extra cost. What you never do is pay per core. There isn’t a single licensing model from RH that forces you to do that. If you license individually, each license supports one bare metal machine, or two VMs. This guy is full of shit. He’s just mad everything isn’t $0.
stephen_g 4y ago
CentOS as ‘a useful distribution for what 95% of what CentOS users were using it for’ has been discontinued. We used to use it, and we just can’t anymore - several years before the promised support period was up…

sekh60 4y ago

And to further add, a lot of the major Red Hat backed projects switched to using Centos steam as the officially supported redhat lineage. Ceph and OpenStack Kolla are both good, major examples.

treffer 4y ago
Which are in large parts RH/IBM open source projects, too
- KingOfCoders 4y ago
  "lot of the major Red Hat backed projects switched to using Centos" "Which are in large parts RH/IBM open source projects, too" ?
infinet 4y ago
CERN was a big user of CentOS. After redhat changed CentOS8 EOL, CERN was allowed to use RHEL. Last time I checked, they suggested others in high energy physics community to use Rocky or Alma if RHEL is not an option.
- dralley 4y ago
  CERN is backing CentOS Stream https://mobile.twitter.com/passthejoe/status/1446931447118372867 https://mobile.twitter.com/passthejoe/status/144693144711837...
- infinet 4y ago
  Well, I checked again. From CERN Oct 28, 2022 Linux Future Committee meeting [1]: - Several bugs have been encountered in Stream, which were not present in RHEL. - Some user communities had previously expressed concerns on the feasibility of using Stream in a production setting. This feeling has also recently been expressed internally by some IT groups. - CERN is evaluating our original recommendation [0] of utilising CentOS Stream as the default Linux Operating System. [0] https://linux.web.cern.ch/#update-on-centos-linux-strategy https://linux.web.cern.ch/#update-on-centos-linux-strategy [1] https://indico.cern.ch/category/13390/ https://indico.cern.ch/category/13390/

simonh 4y ago

Something still exists that is called CentOS, but as an upstream to rather than a downstream from RH, it’s not equivalent or even similar to what CentOS used to be.

flanked-evergl 4y ago
To me it is not that critical what the specific organizational structure is that relates to CentOS Stream and it's relation to RHEL. What matters more is how it affects me as someone using it. CentOS was never RHEL, it was though very close, CentOS Stream is also very close. Whenever I used RHEL or CentOS before CentOS Stream I always updated to the latest versions of packages for the major release version, if I use CentOS stream I will still get updates to the latest versions of packages for the major release version. Maybe I get them a bit earlier than RHEL, but this to me is somewhat irrelevant. If I want reproducibility there are still plenty of ways to get it, including RHEL UBI.
- type0 4y ago
  > CentOS was never RHEL, it was though very close, CentOS Stream is also very close. It was close enough, Stream is almost as close and for some people it isn't close enough when they need bit for bit compatibility for the software they are going to run
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  UBI is fine for deployment. But in a shop where development workstations are all rhel, it was nice to know that the package versions available for 7.9 matched for both rhel and centos. It isn't that centos stream has no value, its just it isn't the same value. Now rocky is. Our business already made the switch for anything it was using centos for.
mekster 4y ago
What is such a big difference as not to keep using it? You seem to believe a community supported distro was as good as a corporate supported distro and put such a high faith in it but now somehow it's all corrupt when RH supports it putting it as an upstream? If your usage is that critical, why not buy RHEL (or Ubuntu extended support) for 10 years support and stop freaking out like your Linux days have come to an end?

jwitthuhn 4y ago

Stream is inherently less well-tested than the normal stable releases. I'm not aware of any specific bugs that have come up in it, but it get updates before red hat is willing to push those updates to people who have a support contract. Stream also notably has a much shorter lifecycle, with support for 8 Stream ending in 2024, compared to 2029 for rhel/rocky/alma. To me the main value of using rhel-based distros is the great reliability and long support life. Stream compromises on both of those compared to what normal centos offered, and rocky and alma currently offer.

christophilus 4y ago
I don't think Stream compromises in any significant way on reliability. They test it rigorously. The short support window is a bit of a bummer, though. That said, I'm running CentOS Stream 9 right now. It's supported until 2027. I generally like to keep my operating systems relatively up to date, so a roughly 5 year support window is adequate for me.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mekster 4y ago
  5 years sounds good enough. Ubuntu does that too with LTS unless you go extended 10 years support. People freaking out because their free candy is no longer as tasty as one could hope, it looks quite funny they have zero willingness to pay for such a long support effort.
drewlander 4y ago
The shorter lifecycle is only for 8. CentOS Stream 9 is EOL the same time as RHEL 9 full support page (unless I am reading it wrong) https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/
- j33zusjuice 4y ago
  You are. The charts are confusing. At the bottom it says full support ends May 31, 2027. Red Hat made some strange decisions with the way they’re handling Stream vs RHEL, plus the communication was abysmal, and they changed models mid-cycle. Be mad at them for that all you want, the rest was overblown. This company could have just used Stream 9 if he wanted a free OS. Since he’s virtualizing, he could have bought hypervisor licenses for $4k a piece that allow you to run as many VMs as your hypervisor can handle. He could have used OpenShift for virtualization and container orchestration, and just paid for the OpenShift licensing. If you use OpenShift, you can run all the RHEL VMs and UBIs you’d like at no extra cost. What you never do is pay per core. There isn’t a single licensing model from RH that forces you to do that. If you license individually, each license supports one bare metal machine, or two VMs. This guy is full of shit. He’s just mad everything isn’t $0.

stephen_g 4y ago

CentOS as ‘a useful distribution for what 95% of what CentOS users were using it for’ has been discontinued. We used to use it, and we just can’t anymore - several years before the promised support period was up…