4 ms·

If you thought you could install RHEL packages on SLES, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? Also I'm not sure what "new" or "existing"

If you thought you could install RHEL packages on SLES, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? Also I'm not sure what "new" or "existing" users have to do with it. I've never used RHEL so I'm technically a new RHEL user, but I don't have the misconception that distro packages are interchangeable.

freedomben 3y ago
> If you thought you could install RHEL packages on SLES, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? I didn't know what the differences were. I learn by doing. Everybody has to install and try a distro for the first time at some point. Unless you are arguing that you were born with innate knowledge of Suse, then at some point you didn't know either. > Also I'm not sure what "new" or "existing" users have to do with it. I've never used RHEL so I'm technically a new RHEL user, but I don't have the misconception that distro packages are interchangeable. I would argue that you actually have the misconception, so this is ironically pretty good evidence that "new" or "existing" users does matter. In the RHEL ecosystem, packages can often be installed on any other (non-Suse) RPM distro, as long as the dependencies are met. For example, Fedora packages can be put on RHEL or CentOS or Alma or Rocky or Amazon Linux or Oracle Linux or Scientific Linux etc. I have some packages built for EL9 that are installed on my Fedora machine right now. Putting on a different distro you run a risk of having broken dependencies, but things are largely the same. The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here.
- Arnavion 3y ago
  >Everybody has to install and try a distro for the first time at some point. Unless you are arguing that you were born with innate knowledge of Suse, then at some point you didn't know either. No, it's absurd to assume that you can transplant distro packages, not that you can't. And I don't really care to argue with you about this. Your incorrect assumptions are your problem, not mine. >I would argue that you actually have the misconception, so this is ironically pretty good evidence that "new" or "existing" users does matter. Wrong. Once again I remind you that you're the one who made the incorrect assumption and got burned by it, so your attempt at deflecting is laughable. >In the RHEL ecosystem, packages can often be installed on any other (non-Suse) RPM distro, as long as the dependencies are met. "As long as the dependencies are met" is doing some pretty heavy lifting there, isn't it? And why do you think your attempt to install those RHEL RPMs on SUSE failed? >For example, Fedora packages can be put on RHEL or CentOS or Alma or Rocky or Amazon Linux or Oracle Linux or Scientific Linux etc. First of all, four of the distros in that list are intentionally the same distro (RHEL, Alma, Rocky, Oracle), so it is expected that their assumptions and dependencies line up to allow you to install packages built for one on the other. Second of all, it is absolutely not true that packages from CentOS (assuming we're referring to Stream) and Fedora can always be installed on RHEL or vice versa. The whole point of them being upstream of RHEL is that they can have newer dependencies. Hypothetically Fedora can switch the libfoo package to v3 with a different soname while RHEL still has it as v2, so any package that depends on the v3 soname cannot be installed on a v2 OS or vice versa. Also, unlike all those distros which are either upstream or downstream of RHEL, SLES is not. So once again I ask, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? It sounds like you just assumed that SLES is upstream or downstream of RHEL, and made not even a cursory documentation search, nor talked to the SLES reps apparently, to relieve yourself of that assumption. >I have some packages built for EL9 that are installed on my Fedora machine right now. Putting on a different distro you run a risk of having broken dependencies, but things are largely the same. "The packages work as long as you ignore all the things that make them not work." >The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Debian and Ubuntu will have exactly the same problem as the Fedora and RHEL example. Actually worse, because Ubuntu isn't a strict downstream of Debian but a random snapshot of Debian while it's between releases. The packages in Ubuntu can end up not corresponding to any Debian stable nor unstable. And again, the scenario of taking RPMs from RHEL and trying to put them onto SLES is equivalent to taking RPMs from RHEL and trying to put them onto Debian. If the latter sounds absurd to you, why did you think the former made sense? >Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here. No, you just have very bad ideas about how Linux works and are weirdly stubborn about correcting them.
  - starttoaster 3y ago
    I think the end-all-be-all of this obviously spiraling conversation is: the other user expected SLES to be a drop-in replacement for RHEL/CentOS, but it wasn't. So why did they not consider Suse for their enterprise uses? Because they had existing workflows that work on RHEL-like operating systems, and Suse would require more work and time to adopt than those alternatives. All of that is completely fair and valid. And to make your point: all you have to do is learn the operating system and suddenly that's not much of a concern any more. If the free alternatives aren't as feasible in the future, I'm sure there may be more appetite for that kind of effort.
    - Arnavion 3y ago
      I don't really have any comment on whether SLES was suitable for their RHEL shop or not. This entire subthread rabbit hole is just about their absurd assumption that packages can be transplanted between distros and their subsequent doubling-down on it.
      - tiberious726 3y ago
        Eh... It's absurd if you actually know how packages work or have ever built a package. A Linux end user, just starting out experimenting with different distros trying to install random packages they find online and not reading the right high-level documentation (like that debian link above) could very easily have the (false) experience that there are three kinds of Linuxes inside of which packages are largely interopable: RPM, DEB, and pacman . And to be fair, if they don't mind really messing up their system and bring enough different versioned dependencies in, this is kinda true, at least until they try to update. SUSE completely breaks this illusion. This thread brought me back to when I was first messing with Linux distros, I used some insane program called something like 'alien' to try to install .deb packages into Fedore Core, with no idea how wrong minded that whole enterprise was
  - freedomben 3y ago
    You're arguing against a straw man, but if that makes you feel better, go for it. You're putting words in my mouth that I never said and twisting the ones I did say as uncharitably as you can, and then arguing against them. I'm not going to engage anymore because I'm starting to get irritated by that, and my goal of commenting on HN is to broaden horizons and satisfy curiosity, not to engage in unproductive Internet arguments. If my criticisms of suse hit a sore point with you, then I apologize. My intent was not to criticize suse. I'm sure it's a fine distro. My intent was to share my experience of moving from RHEL to Suse, as others were discussing changing from RHEL to possibly Suse. If you do that, you will probably have to modify your RPM specs because they won't (or at least didn't back when I tried) work on Suse without changes. Since many RHEL users use it to run their own apps in production, and all their RPM writing experience is RHEL, it's relevant to consider.
- creatonez 3y ago
  > The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here. This is something that is explicitly warned against by the Debian developers - https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_FrankenDebian https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_Frank...
  - freedomben 3y ago
    Agreed. I didn't and wouldn't say it's a good practice. It can be quite risky in fact. I only said it was possible. Your warning is a good one as I didn't intend to imply that just because you ,can doesn't mean you should

freedomben 3y ago

> If you thought you could install RHEL packages on SLES, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? I didn't know what the differences were. I learn by doing. Everybody has to install and try a distro for the first time at some point. Unless you are arguing that you were born with innate knowledge of Suse, then at some point you didn't know either. > Also I'm not sure what "new" or "existing" users have to do with it. I've never used RHEL so I'm technically a new RHEL user, but I don't have the misconception that distro packages are interchangeable. I would argue that you actually have the misconception, so this is ironically pretty good evidence that "new" or "existing" users does matter. In the RHEL ecosystem, packages can often be installed on any other (non-Suse) RPM distro, as long as the dependencies are met. For example, Fedora packages can be put on RHEL or CentOS or Alma or Rocky or Amazon Linux or Oracle Linux or Scientific Linux etc. I have some packages built for EL9 that are installed on my Fedora machine right now. Putting on a different distro you run a risk of having broken dependencies, but things are largely the same. The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here.

Arnavion 3y ago
>Everybody has to install and try a distro for the first time at some point. Unless you are arguing that you were born with innate knowledge of Suse, then at some point you didn't know either. No, it's absurd to assume that you can transplant distro packages, not that you can't. And I don't really care to argue with you about this. Your incorrect assumptions are your problem, not mine. >I would argue that you actually have the misconception, so this is ironically pretty good evidence that "new" or "existing" users does matter. Wrong. Once again I remind you that you're the one who made the incorrect assumption and got burned by it, so your attempt at deflecting is laughable. >In the RHEL ecosystem, packages can often be installed on any other (non-Suse) RPM distro, as long as the dependencies are met. "As long as the dependencies are met" is doing some pretty heavy lifting there, isn't it? And why do you think your attempt to install those RHEL RPMs on SUSE failed? >For example, Fedora packages can be put on RHEL or CentOS or Alma or Rocky or Amazon Linux or Oracle Linux or Scientific Linux etc. First of all, four of the distros in that list are intentionally the same distro (RHEL, Alma, Rocky, Oracle), so it is expected that their assumptions and dependencies line up to allow you to install packages built for one on the other. Second of all, it is absolutely not true that packages from CentOS (assuming we're referring to Stream) and Fedora can always be installed on RHEL or vice versa. The whole point of them being upstream of RHEL is that they can have newer dependencies. Hypothetically Fedora can switch the libfoo package to v3 with a different soname while RHEL still has it as v2, so any package that depends on the v3 soname cannot be installed on a v2 OS or vice versa. Also, unlike all those distros which are either upstream or downstream of RHEL, SLES is not. So once again I ask, what did you think the difference between RHEL and SLES was? It sounds like you just assumed that SLES is upstream or downstream of RHEL, and made not even a cursory documentation search, nor talked to the SLES reps apparently, to relieve yourself of that assumption. >I have some packages built for EL9 that are installed on my Fedora machine right now. Putting on a different distro you run a risk of having broken dependencies, but things are largely the same. "The packages work as long as you ignore all the things that make them not work." >The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Debian and Ubuntu will have exactly the same problem as the Fedora and RHEL example. Actually worse, because Ubuntu isn't a strict downstream of Debian but a random snapshot of Debian while it's between releases. The packages in Ubuntu can end up not corresponding to any Debian stable nor unstable. And again, the scenario of taking RPMs from RHEL and trying to put them onto SLES is equivalent to taking RPMs from RHEL and trying to put them onto Debian. If the latter sounds absurd to you, why did you think the former made sense? >Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here. No, you just have very bad ideas about how Linux works and are weirdly stubborn about correcting them.
- starttoaster 3y ago
  I think the end-all-be-all of this obviously spiraling conversation is: the other user expected SLES to be a drop-in replacement for RHEL/CentOS, but it wasn't. So why did they not consider Suse for their enterprise uses? Because they had existing workflows that work on RHEL-like operating systems, and Suse would require more work and time to adopt than those alternatives. All of that is completely fair and valid. And to make your point: all you have to do is learn the operating system and suddenly that's not much of a concern any more. If the free alternatives aren't as feasible in the future, I'm sure there may be more appetite for that kind of effort.
  - Arnavion 3y ago
    I don't really have any comment on whether SLES was suitable for their RHEL shop or not. This entire subthread rabbit hole is just about their absurd assumption that packages can be transplanted between distros and their subsequent doubling-down on it.
    - tiberious726 3y ago
      Eh... It's absurd if you actually know how packages work or have ever built a package. A Linux end user, just starting out experimenting with different distros trying to install random packages they find online and not reading the right high-level documentation (like that debian link above) could very easily have the (false) experience that there are three kinds of Linuxes inside of which packages are largely interopable: RPM, DEB, and pacman . And to be fair, if they don't mind really messing up their system and bring enough different versioned dependencies in, this is kinda true, at least until they try to update. SUSE completely breaks this illusion. This thread brought me back to when I was first messing with Linux distros, I used some insane program called something like 'alien' to try to install .deb packages into Fedore Core, with no idea how wrong minded that whole enterprise was
- freedomben 3y ago
  You're arguing against a straw man, but if that makes you feel better, go for it. You're putting words in my mouth that I never said and twisting the ones I did say as uncharitably as you can, and then arguing against them. I'm not going to engage anymore because I'm starting to get irritated by that, and my goal of commenting on HN is to broaden horizons and satisfy curiosity, not to engage in unproductive Internet arguments. If my criticisms of suse hit a sore point with you, then I apologize. My intent was not to criticize suse. I'm sure it's a fine distro. My intent was to share my experience of moving from RHEL to Suse, as others were discussing changing from RHEL to possibly Suse. If you do that, you will probably have to modify your RPM specs because they won't (or at least didn't back when I tried) work on Suse without changes. Since many RHEL users use it to run their own apps in production, and all their RPM writing experience is RHEL, it's relevant to consider.
creatonez 3y ago
> The same is also true for Debian, Ubuntu, and many other .deb distros. This is far more common in the linux ecosystem than not. Suse seems to me to be the odd-one-out here. This is something that is explicitly warned against by the Debian developers - https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_FrankenDebian https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_Frank...
- freedomben 3y ago
  Agreed. I didn't and wouldn't say it's a good practice. It can be quite risky in fact. I only said it was possible. Your warning is a good one as I didn't intend to imply that just because you ,can doesn't mean you should