It’s become clear to many that Red Hat’s recent missteps with CentOS and the availability of RHEL source code indicate that it’s fallen from its respected place as “the open organization.” SUSE seems to be poised to benefit from Red Hat’s errors. We connect the dots.

1 point

Saw the thumbnail and for a second I thought a new backrooms video dropped.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

It has “become clear”. Has it?

Red Hat contributes more to Open Source than pretty much anybody. Certainly more than SUSE. That seems self-evident. If you want to debate, bring receipts.

As per the article, SUSE gets most of its money from SAP. SAP was founded by a bunch of ex-IBM people in Germany. They make IBM seem like cowboys.

The new SUSE CEO is ex Red Hat. Again, according the the article, the hope was that he would bring some of the Red Hat “open source magic” but SUSE has proven too “corporate”. Not exactly supporting their own argument there.

I am not close enough to the situation to know, but I doubt SUSE is taking over anything from Red Hat soon. RHEL is so far ahead that they have multiple distros trying to be “alternate” suppliers of RHEL by offering compatible distros. SUSE themselves are doing that now. If the world is looking to SUSE, why isn’t anybody trying to clone SUSE Enterprise?

SUSE is making some smart moves, given that they are the underdog. But let’s not confuse that with SUSE pulling ahead of Red Hat.

permalink
report
reply
24 points
*

Rocky Linux and possibly Alamalinux are the future if openSUSE is anything to go by

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Am I living under a rock? because I’ve never heard of Rocky and Almalinux lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If you care at all about Red Hat Enterprise Linux or CentOS, yes. See the Dec 2020 announcement. https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yes. Is it moist under there?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Two direct continuations of CentOS aiming for full RHEL compatibility

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They are enterprise server oriented

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Rocky doesn’t support the range or products needed to be “the” enterprise suite.

Heck you could even go Liberty Linux and have the same bins as Rock but support under SUSE, plus k8s, plus update management, plus security tools, plus k8s multi cluster, plus some ai thing to convince investors you are doing something with it.

Like, and all that’s great, but honestly still not “enough” all under one roof for some enterprise costumers who are just looking to turn a problem into an expense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Alma has been good for me the past year or so

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I mean use Rocky all the time. Its good for me as a Dev and engineer. Its just not what I would spend a lot of time trying to convince management to spend money on for support and such.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Context ? I’m out of the loop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

OpenSUSE isn’t enterprise friendly for a many reasons. It lacks the features of rhel like systems and the simplicity of Debian. It somehow manages to be more complex and confusing than both

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

OpenSUSE isn’t enterprise friendly for a many reasons.

Isn’t SLE targeted towards enterprise anyways?

It lacks the features of rhel like systems and the simplicity of Debian. It somehow manages to be more complex and confusing than both

I’m by no means an expert, but I don’t recognize this. Would you be so kind to elaborate?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

wow you are anti opensuse bullshit is so tiresome, first time I am thinking about blocking someone on lemmy, congrats.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

To be blunt…

Redhat contributes a huge amount to the community.

The only ones who think they’re misstepping or whatever are just making noise and likely aren’t even using RHEL.

I don’t think people realise exactly how far their contributions go for usability, and getting rid of Redhat of actually a really bad thing for Linux.

I’d even argue, the only people complaining about this likely don’t contribute anything to Linux anyway…

The only thing they did is stop oracle pulling their repo, rebranding and selling support slightly cheaper.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

The lost my trust when they blocked the ability to share the source code

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

But you probably trust them for every other project like pipewire and such?

In practice, Linux is that it is today thanks to Redhat.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Linux is that it is today thanks to Redhat.

Mmm, maybe - but only if you allow that the same can be said for the tens of thousands of other companies and individuals who have contributed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They don’t own pipewire, samba or any other community project. They just help fund and develop them

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I disagree with you. You seem keen to insult people who might hold an alternative opinion, so no doubt you’ll attack me as well.

Redhat did far more than just stymie Oracle. That you’re saying that suggests you’re either deliberately ignoring the facts (Ending CentOS 8 7 years early with no prior announcement, being massively disrespectful to the volunteer CentOS maintainers and support staff), deliberately paywalling source deliberately to target all rebuilders, not just Oracle, generally being amateurish and entitled dicks to the community through their official communications and so on) - or you simply don’t know.

About the only thing you say that is correct, is that Redhat do contribute a lot to FOSS, even now. That deserves respect, but it gets harder to do that at a personal level each time they do something simultaneously dumb and selfishly corporate. A lot of people have given Redhat a lot of space and stayed quiet out of respect of their history. Maybe they are right to, but the direction they’re heading doesn’t look healthy to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

To my eye, Red Hat’s “direction” has not changed since they formed the Fedora Project to begin with ( the first attempt at keeping RHEL and their “no cost” options distinct ). Attempt number two was the creation of CentOS Stream. Now it is the way they manage RHEL SRPMS. No change in direction. No change in intent. No overall change in their behaviour.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Half of what you’re writing isn’t really true.

You’re likely assuming a lot of that.

Everyone knows that Oracle was the reason. Sorry, but they basically bragged that they stole the latest rhel source code and added an unbreakable kernel. And they purposely targeted Redhats customers with support by stealing their work.

In other words, their only other choice was to basically close shop… Oracle has been screwing them for years,

Also, sorry, but is it disrespectful when a company drops a project? We could make that same comment about every project. Also, CentOS is open source, as you said, so anyone can download it . They didn’t.

You’re also likely assuming they’re not pouring a huge amount of resources into it too

The perfect current example of rhel improving Linux is pipewire. They are literally unfucking Linux one component at a time in large chunks. It’s insane that people here are treating them so badly.

In fact, the community has no problems mistreating Linux developers over tiny things, which is why developers like myself which have been badly attacked in the past have stopped contributing

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Half of what you’re writing isn’t really true.

'tis, you know.

Also, sorry, but is it disrespectful when a company drops a project? We could make that same comment about every project. Also, CentOS is open source, as you said, so anyone can download it . They didn’t.

Dropped a project? It wasn’t actually their project. I think you’re missing some history there. CentOS was a distro started by Greg and Rocky entirely separate from RHEL and ran for many years. Redhat took over CentOS through methods that may be seen as underhand until they had sufficient seats and influence over the Board to have control of it, and then they took/stole the CentOS name. CentOS Linux is an example of a FOSS project that got taken over by a corporate entity, and then killed. (Anyone heard of embrace, extend, extinguish before?) Now CentOS only exists as CentOS Stream, which is repositioned upstream of RHEL and is a staging area/testbed between Fedora and RHEL. Redhat say it’s not suitable for production use, so nobody other than testers uses it, afaik.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Redhat have done a lot for Linux in the past. And that will likely continue for some time yet. But they have done some seriously questionable things ever since IBM bought them out. I don’t like the direction they seem to be heading in as withmany of IBM products.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Is there a “questionable thing” other than your views on CemtOS? I do not watch them super closely but I do not recall anything else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

To be honest, their demand that OpenSUSE rebrand left a bad taste in my mouth. I get the logic behind it, but the time for that passed a long time ago (probably about 15 years ago).

permalink
report
reply
7 points

their demand that OpenSUSE rebrand

Slight changing of the tone, there. They have formally requested the change, not demanded.

Maybe that will follow, I can’t read the future, but it’s not the case today.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mean yes they did “formally request” it, but given the power dynamic between a FOSS project and a large technology company, openSUSE is not in a position where they could possibly refuse. So is there a difference between a request and a demand?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If there’s no requirement, maybe openSUSE will just formally politely refuse to change names

permalink
report
parent
reply

Linux

!linux@lemmy.ml

Create post

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word “Linux” in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

  • Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
  • No misinformation
  • No NSFW content
  • No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

Community stats

  • 6.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.6K

    Posts

  • 180K

    Comments