Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AlmaLinux No Longer Aims For 1:1 Compatibility With RHEL

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
    Good.

    Now Red Hat needs to finish turning the screws by taking a page out of the NFL's playbook.

    For those of you that don't know the NFL strictly control who and how the name Super Bowl is used, for instance you may have noticed that in any none NFL commercial it is always referred to as "The Big Game" or something similar but no one outside the NFL is allowed to use Super Bowl because it is trademarked and the NFL aggressively protects that trademark.

    Red Hat should do the same thing and say that going forward no one is allowed to claim they are or are not binary or bug-for-bug compatible with RHEL, Red Hat or any reference to Red Hat's software.

    If these people want to build a Linux based business then let them do it on their own, no more free ride.
    Why do you even use linux and post here if you hate the gpl and everything about the community?

    I'm sure there are plenty of people in the fox news comment section whom you would get along with

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
      Good.
      Red Hat should do the same thing and say that going forward no one is allowed to claim they are or are not binary or bug-for-bug compatible with RHEL, Red Hat or any reference to Red Hat's software.

      If these people want to build a Linux based business then let them do it on their own, no more free ride.
      beside the fact that you're missing that RH is freeriding itself (or do you think they wrote all the software they package and sells supports to?) you also missed that this is exactly what RH have been doing since 20 years.

      What was called RedHat Linux splitted into RHEL (and lately Fedora was created) when RH prohibited to redistribute it's distro using the RH name.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx View Post

        What?

        Fedora -> CentOS Stream -> RHEL.

        By "upstream" do you mean various upstream projects or do you mean upstream to RHEL? CentOS Stream is upstream RHEL. I'm not sure what you mean by "so exactly what CentOS Stream is doing". None of the rebuilds can do exactly what CentOS Stream is doing because its' the only one that is RHEL's upstream.


        contributing upstream means working on the software inside of the packages and submitting those patches to the original project. alma does nothing but run rpm rebuilds in a loop.

        Comment


        • #34
          There seems to be a lot of ungrateful people around towards Ubuntu ,and the fact that Ubuntu was one of the first and biggest Linux promoters in the beginnings and nowadays.

          I remember when I was using 8.04 ,it was what brought me to Linux ,the most polished and comprehensive alternative OS. For that ,they have my respect.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
            In the end, all of this uncertainty around RHEL will undoubtedly boost the adoption of Ubuntu LTS in enterprises, especially in non-US[A] territories.
            I keep seeing people pit Red Hat against Canonical, but:

            Red Hat = 13K employees, $16B revenue
            Canonical = 1K, $175M revenue

            Canonical has strong mindshare among professional developers and home users. That's great. But for Canonical to grab a significant chunk of those enterprise contracts is ... well, a lot of things would need to happen in the industry.

            You need to understand what "enterprise" means. These are multi-million-dollar contracts for licenses and support of production-ready systems that lose millions of dollars on minutes of downtime and security breaches. Canonical is simply not in that playing field. If Red Hat falls for whatever reason, customers would probably go to Oracle, Microsoft, and perhaps Google would step up. Canonical is not the kind of company that can step up for the kind of support that "enterprises" need. At least not right now.

            This is not a dig at Canonical! Ubuntu is a great operating system with a superb user experience and intriguing (sometimes controversial) innovation. It moved the whole GNU/Linux ecosystem forward and set new standards for UX in this often opaque world. But there's a reason why companies are hungry for a bit-by-bit clone of RHEL instead of going with Ubuntu.

            And Debian, which has only community support (well, a few companies offer some basic support), is entirely a non-starter for the enterprise market. Again, at this moment.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Quackdoc View Post

              did you just call alma of all people a leech? Alma and oracle are very active contributors to the rhel and linux ecosystem at large, people can hate on them all they like, but oracle especially, linux would be in a far worse state, and this includes rhel, without oracle, and alma have been good contributors to the larger rhel ecosystem.
              this is like calling the companies that shipped CD's full of software back in the day active contributors. I think walnut creek did more for linux then alma. Alma and oracle are correctly called leeches because if everyone used alma or oracle linux the host (IBM) would just shutdown rhel as a product that makes no profit for them.

              Is alma important to the community? Yeah, but that is not the same as them being contributors.

              Comment


              • #37
                I predict that Alma and Rocky will thus disappear into irrelevance in the medium term. It would have been a chance to join forces and shake up the market. However, the fact that there are still no alliances is an indication for me that there will only be losers apart from Red Hat. Oracle's role is unclear at this point, but Alma, Rocky and SUSE should have handled it differently.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by fitzie View Post

                  this is like calling the companies that shipped CD's full of software back in the day active contributors. I think walnut creek did more for linux then alma. Alma and oracle are correctly called leeches because if everyone used alma or oracle linux the host (IBM) would just shutdown rhel as a product that makes no profit for them.

                  Is alma important to the community? Yeah, but that is not the same as them being contributors.
                  thats not remotely true, alma contributors are massive to the greater rhel ecosystem, alma already covered this themselves, but a specifc alma contributor maintains 600 packages on the epel. do they contribute directly to rhel's code base? maybe maybe not, not too sure. but both alma and linux add value to the rhel ecosystem, oracle by being very important to linux as a whole including the kernel, and alma directly contributing to the greater rhel ecosystem, including expanding to new hardware which rhel explictly said they do not count as leeches.

                  different from distributions that might, for example, add a new architecture or compile flag (we fully support you in expanding Linux capabilities rather than imitating them)
                  they most certainly contribute to the greater rhel ecosystem and I would consider that quite valuable.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by emblemparade View Post

                    Red Hat = 13K employees, $16B revenue

                    I will need sources here. IBM's 2022 report states they made ~$17B in revenue from "Software" of which Red Hat is only a part (I can't seem to see the proportion anywhere).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by CTown View Post
                      I completely understand the need for a free version of RHEL. It has been the standard over a long time.
                      Still, is there a reason why Suse's offering can't fill the void for most people?
                      Same reason you can't woo some people away from Windows to $anything_else; resistance to change.
                      Isn't OpenSuse the Suse version of CentOS?
                      I have but a limited understanding of the way things work in the red corner of the distroscape, so take with measurement error…

                      It is my understanding that CentOS rebuilt RHEL (back then, and currently Stream). Compatibility is a key point of their mission statement. Mentions of rebranding efforts being somewhat time-intensive are also stuck in my memory.

                      For openSUSE-Leap, compatibility is — the way I experience it — only an opportunistic goal. At the same time, Leap outright imports most binaries from the SLE basesystem without rebuild. SLE branding is also in add-on packages, so to debrand, you just choose not to install certain RPMs in a Leap system.

                      From my green corner, the situation in the red section feels quite puzzling.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X