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

[anarki2]

You assume wrong. I smell a PEBKAC error.

I don't understand your attitude, CentOS 8.0 factually has at least 2 critical bugs: the first one is the one mentioned by the dude you responded to. Try installing from netinstall, it'll never work without the workaround in that bug ticket. You "smell" that everyone in that ticket is an idiot? How about you try it for yourself, genius?

Second, the kernel never updates. Just never. Unless you stumble upon this article:

https://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/Rele...s/CentOSStream

You're left with an unpatched kernel. Sweet, huh?

Just for sh*ts and giggles, CentOS 8 also breaks in UEFI mode in Hyper-V. It only boots like every 20th time, until then, it's a reboot loop. Too bad Hyper-V stops the VM after like 5 failed attempts, so often times, your VM will fail to reboot or start up, and you have to manually try starting it up until it finally succeeds. You have to do with to every C8 VM, after every reboot.

Fourth, the installer explicitly asks you if you want to enable AppStream, yet it enables it every time, even if you say NO. Which wouldn't bother me this f*cking much if AppStream wouldn't break various 3rd party repos, like PostgreSQL.

https://noobient.com/2019/11/26/post...-8-and-rhel-8/

These four issues all came from my VERY limited testing so far. I can't imagine how many bugs are out there I didn't have to deal with yet.

TLDR C7 was extremely reliable, but C8 is definitely a heck of a mess at the moment.

[Britoid]

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.

If you want to contribute to CentOS, contribute upstream.

Red Hat's ethos has always been that if you wanted to improve RHEL.

[anarki2]

In practice, it was released on Monday. At least that's what /etc/centos-release told me that day. Needless to say, I was kinda confused, as there was no official word anywhere yet at the time.

[kgonzales]

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 assume wrong. I smell a PEBKAC error.

[kgonzales]

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.

[kgonzales]

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.

[ZeroPointEnergy]

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.

[CommunityMember]

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.

[andyprough]

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

[Britoid]

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.