Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CentOS Stream 9 Now Available To Live On The Bleeding-Edge Of RHEL9

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

  • #21
    As Fedora stops updates of a branch shortly after the next branch releases where are the updates for Centos 9 coming from. Fedora isn't going to be doing updates to F34 for 10 years.

    I actually don't have an issue with this model. Redhat it's self has always been a little to stale for my needs.

    As for getting from Centos 8 -> 9. If it isn't a production system I would try

    dnf upgrade --releasever=9

    I find that has been far more reliable that dist-upgrade has been.

    Comment


    • #22
      PSA: CentOS Stream 9 iso's --- AND their checksums -- can be downloaded e.g. from

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by MadeUpName View Post
        As Fedora stops updates of a branch shortly after the next branch releases where are the updates for Centos 9 coming from. Fedora isn't going to be doing updates to F34 for 10 years.
        Contributing to CentOS Stream makes you part of a much larger story

        Comment


        • #24
          browseria A correction: CentOS Stream only has a 5 year lifecycle (more like 5.5-6 if you include pre-RHEL GA). Stream is only relevant while RHEL has minor updates, which end 5 years into the 10 year lifecycle with n.10. When the five years are up you can either transition to a new Stream release, or RHEL/clone project.

          MadeUpName The releasever would actually be '9-stream', and you would have to adjust the repositories as Stream 9 and Stream 8 use different mirror networks. I would not bet on "dnf system-upgrade [download|update] --releasever 9-stream" working out of the box the way Fedora handles these things. Reprovisioning is the best approach here.

          As for CentOS updates, they aren't reliant on Fedora. RHEL and, as its upstream, CentOS Stream fork from a Fedora release. That forms the foundation of Enterprise Linux <X>, which is then managed, developed, and updated separately. Yes there is cross talk across the ecosystem at various points for various reasons, but from the time of forking on they are distinct projects.

          Edit: After re-reading, are you talking about CentOS Linux, not Stream? If so, there is no 9. You'd need to look at RHEL or a rebuild project like AlmaLinux.

          pipe13 The official CentOS (non-rsync) mirror for Stream 9 is http://mirror.stream.centos.org/9-stream/BaseOS/<arch>/iso/

          To discover the list of available Stream 9 mirrors, use: https://mirrors.centos.org/

          Cheers,
          Mike
          Last edited by mroche; 03 December 2021, 07:52 PM.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by mroche View Post

            pipe13 The official CentOS (non-rsync) mirror for Stream 9 is http://mirror.stream.centos.org/9-stream/BaseOS/<arch>/iso/

            To discover the list of available Stream 9 mirrors, use: https://mirrors.centos.org/

            Cheers,
            Mike
            Thanks Mike, I did. Or something similar, and Rackspace was at the top of the list. My point being that the Downloads tab of the offical site Michael linked at the end of his article -- https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ -- provides the (alleged) iso, but NOT its checksum. Making it singularly useless from the pov of those (such as myself) most likely wanting to use it.

            I left a comment at the centos-stream site to that effect. Then downloaded the iso from Rackspace and verified its checksum. Presumably any of the other mirrors that have populated Stream 9 would do as well; Rackspace was the one I actually checked as functional.

            Thank you for your contributions, always good to hear from you and Rahul.

            Sincerely,
            Ed

            Comment


            • #26
              pipe13 Ah, I see. Sorry for misunderstanding, and thank you for providing feedback! There are a number of changes that will likely hit that page in the very near future to make things cleaner and more accessible.

              Thanks again for your feedback! For my own understanding, the issue is a) from the checksums point of view, there is no signed file, e.g. checksums.asc, and b) the checksums aren't directly available on the Stream downloads page?

              Cheers,
              Mike

              Comment


              • #27
                mroche Yes, just that. Click https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/, click "Download" to find https://www.centos.org/download/, select "CentOS Stream" and "9" and "x86_64". Maybe it's just me, but my Chrome then immediately shows me a "save download" widget with "CentOS-Stream-9-latest-x86_64-dvd1.iso" which downloads readily enough and certainly looks promising, but without a checksum it's hard to say for sure. It isn't obvious how to get to https://mirrors.centos.org/ from https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/.

                -Ed

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by bash2bash View Post
                  R.I.P. centos! Thank you for the past decades. Of course we are not going to be beta testers for Redhat (at least not without payment). Branding your beta Stream as CentOS is an insult.

                  Already migrated to AlmaLinux. Nice to meet you Alma
                  if you have used Fedora, there aint any difference, Fedora has always been a Test Bed for RHEL

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Anvil View Post

                    if you have used Fedora, there aint any difference, Fedora has always been a Test Bed for RHEL
                    Truth be told so has Centos. The gap just wasn't as large before but Centos patches often went out before Redhat released them.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by SteamPunker View Post
                      Seriously, I appreciate all the contributions both IBM and Red Hat have made to Linux and Open Source over the years (nay, decades), but acquiring CentOS and then effectively killing it was not cool, and caused a lot of problems for a lot of people and organizations. Serious goodwill was squandered here, sorry to say.
                      They "bought" Centos after it had already died as a community project. You may not remember but there was a massive delay in releasing Centos 6 and it was only done after Red Hat donated its build system to Centos. Before then they were failing and alternatives like scientific linux had already abandoned their own rebuild.

                      They tried to revive it and build a community but it is evident there wasnt enough community interest at the time. Even now with Alma and Rocky etc, Centos does the heavy lifting by managing the source repository.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X