Openlitespeed
Should You Replace Red Hat, AlmaLinux, or Rocky Linux
Should You Replace Red Hat, AlmaLinux, or Rocky Linux with Debian?
#Replace #Red #Hat #AlmaLinux #Rocky #Linux
“BeginLinux Guru”
Should you replace Red Hat Enterprise Linux, AlmaLinux, or Rocky Linux with Debian GNU/Linux? Although Debian is a good, stable Linux distro that suitable for many different use cases, it might not always be what you need for business servers or enterprise servers. In this Linux commentary, the…
source
To see the full content, share this page by clicking one of the buttons below |
I don't think so…Debían still using outdated kernel
Debian 12 ❤
james okeef showed everyone what red hat actually thinks about their core customer base. Now they will have to create a new customer base.
My daily driver has been Fedora for over a year and really hope that Red Hat and Evilcorp (IBM) don't pull developers and money from Fedora.
Ubuntu, Suse, and RH are the big three!
currently trying to decide between alma rocky or oracle (i know i know lol) or Debian for my first major server running on my own prolly gotta go with rhel clone still(already know them but want to get good good so i can get a job like yesterday lol)….btw you're quite relatable my man lol glad i ran across this
Big corps requiring certification and stuff like that… yeah, they will be better off buying commercial software for that. If Red Hat is going that way, good luck to them. It will have nothing to do with "free" (from "freedom") software though.
On the desktop, sure. In the enterprise, not a chance.
The answer is no, Debian hasn't even updated their website to make it user friendly. Even arch has a friendlier way to get to the ISO. OpenSUSE, Gentoo, Fedora and Arch are better in the home desktop space. Debian is more targeted towards servers not home desktops, yet people advertise it like as if it were for home user desktops when it's not. Even though it can be, Debian is more for the server audience. And Red Hat as you mentioned is much more superior than Ubuntu due to its compatability with SELinux.
GPL is for the kernel, the kernel is free and open source, but the distributions that use it dont have to be nor are they required to be. Fedora is an excellent choice and not that far from RedHat. I think it's good for server systems to be for profit because money helps make the product more reliable and stronger. There's also other software out there that's used to harden Linux.
I have replaced Windows with Debian.
If you haven't done it by now then you are part of the problem. Corporate-source is not open source. Get on with it people and leave this sh!t in the dust.
Is it a good plan to replace [commercial Linuxes]? A couple of years ago I would have said no. But things changed. Companies like Redhat and Ubuntu no longer see their Linuxes as core products for end users. The evolution of cloud business changed that. Their customers are now no longer the people who developed open source software as well as end users, their customers are enterprises.
OSS developers contribute to society for free, unless doing so is their job. That's not quite true anymore, because having something on GitHub to show off is nearly a prerequisite for getting freelance gigs, which is what many OSS devs live on.
Until recently, the deal between the OSS comunity and OSS companies was that both contribute to the greater good – society – for different reasons but with the same goals.
Now, OSS companies don't care for the community anymore, they systems are pretty much in working order and their development focuses on enterprise business. Their software is still OSS, but it's increasingly designed to not be open anymore. FreeIPA consists off standard components that run on any Linux, hell on any UNIXoid. But it's unsustainable to actually run it on anything but a RedHat clone. Docker is OSS software, but they tried to use their brand to milk money from people publishing their OSS software on their Hub.
People often say that OSS companies like all others have the objective to earn money and of course must have the right to charge money. That's ok. But if you look at what they actually sell, the vast majority is software written by others and put out for free. Docker is awesome, but the real work has been done by the Linux kernel team. RedHat and Canonical contributed a lot of original work and they certainly improved our lifes. But they got carried by the OSS community at least as much as they contributed. Do they really have the right, now that their brands are established and now that they no longer need the OSS community, to put up paywalls and blackmail the very people who worked for them free of charge to pay them?
I always felt that RMS is too paranoid and dogmatic. But looking at recent developments, I have to agree with his stance more and more. You simply can't trust and much less rely on profit oriented entites. Not because this or that one is evil, simply because in a fast economy, slow and honest business will not prevail. The economy is accelerating and we get left behind.
I think the lesson is simple. Those of us who are not enterprises don't need Enterprise Linux or enterprises creating them. We need to make our own and if enterprises like what we do, we should charge them. Just like they charge us. The beer principle. We share it, they have to pay. We and They are not inclusive – not because I want to exclude them, they broke our gentlemen's agreement.
Ya it seems like this is the writing on the wall that the corporate based distros have pretty much failed this community. Everyone seems to be having a mass migration to Debian or Arch. FYI slackware is also another option out there as well as they just recently released a new major release. IF i was the heads of the alma linux and rocky linux distros, right now i would be looking at migrating everything over to debian, and working directly with the debian team to incorporate the enterprise under gurding from RHEL into the core Debian OS and, create a spin disk of core debian that is meant as a enterprise grade debian install. That way we know the code base is rock solid, and our own community will be in control of the enterprise grade OS. And then start promoting that as a free alt to RHEL. Also something that everyone forgets. RHEL makes a killing in training for becoming an RHCE. And also the tests make them more money than a RHEL license does. Its not like people using centos / rocky / alma we draining the company dry of funds they make MASSIVE $$$$$$$$ off our community in general.
The answer is yes.
I'm in the midst of switching to Proxmox (debian).
All operating systems are merely "application libraries" now.
Are not like linux and unix old and there not newer os'es not based linux or some unix . That red hat and ibm – wasn't it quite predictble , talks means nothing for big corp
I respect realisim, however, if we just think this way RMS wouldn't have created GNU and Linus wouldn't have created Linux. It is about moving-off RH to help building a competitor ecosystem that is community-driven at core unlike RH which shows no remorse to breaking promises twice within two years, and still pushing those in their payroll to advocate for their unethical stance.
Good to hear an analysis based on the technical and legal reality that many people, including me, can't avoid entirely.
The risks and efforts involved in shoving another rug under everything would be significant where I work. I added other distros for automated testing though – just in case.
I'm also using Alma and Rocky for my current side project (25 GBit/s firewall/router with optional IDS/IPS). Will try with Debian to see how far it goes, also performance-wise.
Since I'm using nftables directly, I can hopefully avoid going down the SELinux rabbit hole. I'd prefer not to change SELinux policies etc. from outside of affected packages. Thanks for the hint.
Btw. I can only recommend working directly with nftables for more complex configurations. Compared to working with firewall frontends, it's much easier for me to keep track of things when I maintain chains in files under version control.
I get independent devs and hobbyists are hurt by this move, but if you work for a company or otherwise have access to an enterprise license there's no reason to quit red hat.
I’m in love with that beard.
You should replace all distros with Slackware.
I'm doing devops and manageing 120+ servers.
The distribution matters very little IMO.
It's main purpose is to run containers.
If you're app is running inside a container you don't care about the underlying distribution.
I don't understand the mania of using RHEL, that is, if you are not going to pay, for the license there are other much cheaper or free alternatives, the people who use RHEL clones are the same ones who hack the Adobe suite.
Cool stories about history of RHEL and whitehat.. I found that interesting. Nice vid
It seems unnecessary. Red Hat's strength is that corporations with a C-suite want to deal with a corporation with a C-suite, so the clones aren't really competition, because they don't have that sort of corporate structure. Management can be dumb; also, water is wet.
I recently tried Debian (again), thanks but I will stick with Centos Stream, Fedora and Redhat Developer thanks. I think this issue is all a bit of beat-up motivated by some vague idiology 😀
I've used RedHat since 2003, loved RHEL, but that is over now. In my eyes they are worse then Microsoft. At least Microsft was a legitimate competitor with declared intent to cripple open source community, IBM is a rat and traitor, making money from open source yet hurting and bleeding it. I won't migrate existing servers but I am switching to Debian and FreeBSD for new projects. People who continue using RH are making the "deal with the devil". We need to show strength and unity, we need to show RH they can not hit on Open source without consequences. Migrate people, Debian is Ok, I have some installs from Debian 7, still working 24/7 to this day! Its stable! Sc… y.. RH!
Honestly, for large enterprises who have several hundred and even thousands of servers; coupled with hundreds of RHEL Engineering Workstations across the globe, this whole RHEL thing will likely not bother them one bit.
They want the RHEL service agreement and cyber certification + they've got commercial applications that are mission-critical and "certified" for RHEL. The cost and in some cases risk of moving and re-certifying on a different Linux distro isn't worth it to them.
The major corporation a good buddy of mine works for isn't budging off of RHEL even after this news from Red Hat. There are even some smaller companies that I know of in the manufacturing space who rely heavily on RHEL and their support agreement and I know they won't be budging either.
Replacing Arch for Debia,are the BEST and Only Choice to Do…….
sure
I don't use firewalld. Just straight to nftables. Why use an interpreter when one can control the firewall directly.