Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CentOS-8 1911 Released As Rebuild Off Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.1

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by ThiagoCMC View Post
    CentOS is the most bizarre/crap Linux distro out there! The first CentOS 8 boot (minimal) iso fails miserably! You have to change the package mirror manually to be able to proceed with the install... Just TROLOLOL!

    https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16456

    Then, the "Next" button is beyond the screen limits, you can't even see it. Like, WTF?! lol

    Utter crap! How can they release such a broken image like that?

    I assume that whoever uses RedHat-based distros, have no idea about what they're doing!
    Whoever uses RedHat-based distros is almost certainly paid to do so, and probably appreciates all the idiotic errors because working around them means overtime hours. RedHat knows how to keep their end users happy.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by ThiagoCMC View Post
      CentOS is the most bizarre/crap Linux distro out there! The first CentOS 8 boot (minimal) iso fails miserably! You have to change the package mirror manually to be able to proceed with the install... Just TROLOLOL!

      https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=16456

      Then, the "Next" button is beyond the screen limits, you can't even see it. Like, WTF?! lol

      Utter crap! How can they release such a broken image like that?

      I assume that whoever uses RedHat-based distros, have no idea about what they're doing!

      Debian is light years ahead of everybody else.
      You loaded up the wrong ISO. The minimal ISO is usually used with a kick start that defines a mirror, usually booted and installed over the network.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by ThiagoCMC View Post
        CentOS is the most bizarre/crap Linux distro out there! The first CentOS 8 boot (minimal) iso fails miserably! You have to change the package mirror manually to be able to proceed with the install... Just TROLOLOL!
        There is no minimal installer for CentOS 8 yet. The "boot" ISO is a network installer, not a minimal installer (they have a different meaning here). And All you have to do is change from "Closest mirror" to another option and then back and it'll handle things automatically for you. "Closest mirror" is shown as the default option, but it is not actually selected. By default it's expecting you to choose the most optimal mirror that network wise closest to you, either local or external.

        Are you seeing the out-of-screen limits in a VM or on physical hardware? If VM, just "resize to VM". Otherwise, I suggest letting the team know that so they can fix it.

        Cheers,
        Mike

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by nomadewolf View Post

          Solid? Sure.
          But i'm willing to trade some of that stability to get some newer software, polish and kernels...
          Well, I am not.
          I don't think having my system hang at random (and hence induce anxiety) is acceptable.

          But it would be a good idea to have newer versions of software, Windows/macOS-way (e.g. Flatpak, Snap or AppImage (or even packing dynamic libraries)).

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

            Well, I am not.
            I don't think having my system hang at random (and hence induce anxiety) is acceptable.

            But it would be a good idea to have newer versions of software, Windows/macOS-way (e.g. Flatpak, Snap or AppImage (or even packing dynamic libraries)).
            As long as that doesn't include Windows-style installers.

            Those things are an abomination.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Britoid View Post

              You loaded up the wrong ISO. The minimal ISO is usually used with a kick start that defines a mirror, usually booted and installed over the network.
              Has nothing to do with his second complaint:
              Then, the "Next" button is beyond the screen limits, you can't even see it. Like, WTF?! lol

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
                But it would be a good idea to have newer versions of software
                That is what "Software Collections" and "Application Streams" can (optionally) offer. But it is a sufficiently new way to think about things that many people cannot wrap their head around it.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by kgonzales View Post
                  Because its not 1:1 aligned to RHEL. The new terminology is more true. If you want a stable enterprise Linux with a predictable release process, buy RHEL.
                  I work in a company that is a Redhat partner. We got there because when we started we had no money for subscriptions and CentOS was an awesome option as it was 100% free enterprise grade with 10 years of support an 100% RHEL compatible. Obviously as we grew we switched to RHEL because it was an effort less migration and familiar and we are supporting many many other companies who went the same way today.

                  If there wasn't CentOS we would probably be a Debian company today (or even Ubuntu) and many others as well. I don't think what I experienced is a complete anomaly. CentOS has done so much for Redhat it is hard to wrap your head around it.

                  And the only people I saw at work who don't get it are the sales suits from Redhat, who somehow think it takes subscription money away from them not realizing that it basically prepared the complete market for them.

                  If Redhat now starts to purposefully diverge CentOS from RHEL and it isn't compatiple anymore.. guess what that means for the next generation of companies?

                  There is also a second factor to this. Many open source projects can target their tests and development directly at a CentOS image without a second thought about subscription or licensing issues. That's why there is a ton of community support for all sorts of stuff for RHEL via CentOS compatibility. It is just super convenient. Something for example SLES never had and is completely lacking.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by andyprough View Post

                    Whoever uses RedHat-based distros is almost certainly paid to do so, and probably appreciates all the idiotic errors because working around them means overtime hours. RedHat knows how to keep their end users happy.
                    Cute troll, nice pelt.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by ZeroPointEnergy View Post
                      I work in a company that is a Redhat partner. We got there because when we started we had no money for subscriptions and CentOS was an awesome option as it was 100% free enterprise grade with 10 years of support an 100% RHEL compatible. Obviously as we grew we switched to RHEL because it was an effort less migration and familiar and we are supporting many many other companies who went the same way today.

                      If there wasn't CentOS we would probably be a Debian company today (or even Ubuntu) and many others as well. I don't think what I experienced is a complete anomaly. CentOS has done so much for Redhat it is hard to wrap your head around it.

                      And the only people I saw at work who don't get it are the sales suits from Redhat, who somehow think it takes subscription money away from them not realizing that it basically prepared the complete market for them.

                      If Redhat now starts to purposefully diverge CentOS from RHEL and it isn't compatiple anymore.. guess what that means for the next generation of companies?

                      There is also a second factor to this. Many open source projects can target their tests and development directly at a CentOS image without a second thought about subscription or licensing issues. That's why there is a ton of community support for all sorts of stuff for RHEL via CentOS compatibility. It is just super convenient. Something for example SLES never had and is completely lacking.
                      What you don't see and the "sales suits" do see are the very large companies who are literally telling Red Hat that they will use CentOS, they will not contribute to open source (not even to CentOS itself), and they don't see a reason to change while CentOS exists. And the cost for THAT is immense. It's in the tens of millions of dollars per year sucked out of the open source ecosystem.

                      Yes, Red Hat is aware of what CentOS means to it, both good and bad. That is why Red Hat literally pays people to run the CentOS project (and those people are good folks). I've seen the numbers, I've talked to the companies, and I have viewed the damage.

                      Canonical gets it worse than Red Hat, I do see plenty of companies who are using Ubuntu, with zero intention of either contributing to Ubuntu or ever paying Canonical a dime.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X