Re: [CentOS] Ruby on Cent OS 8
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 9:58 AM Steven Rosenberg wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-11-08 at 09:25 +0300, Benson Muite wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Will Ruby on Cent OS 8 be upgraded, the current version 2.5.9 has > > reached EOL. > > I remember being told that while the older version of Ruby is EOL as > far as the Ruby project goes, Red Hat developers still backport > security fixes for the life of the release. The lifecycle for the RHEL 8 Application Streams is publicly documented here: https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhel8-app-streams-life-cycle Ruby 2.5 is supported until May 2029. However, CentOS Linux 8 will be going EOL on December 31, 2021. Users are strongly encouraged to migrate to CentOS Stream 8. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 9-stream modules?
On Sun, Nov 14, 2021 at 4:45 PM Chris Adams wrote: > > I started looking at 9-stream a bit... and I notice there are no package > modules. All the things that were modules in 8/8-stream appear to have > been folded back into the base OS, with no variants included (like > different versions of MariaDB and php for example). Is this expected to > be the way forward, or are modules just still to be filled out? RHEL 9 / CentOS Stream 9 currently has no modules. Over the life of the release, we expect to add them when newer versions of various software stacks are made available. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Introducing CentOS Stream 9
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 12:59 PM Paul Heinlein wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2021, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > Rich Bowen has posted a blog entry "Introducing CentOS Stream 9" > > > > https://blog.centos.org/2021/12/introducing-centos-stream-9/ > > > > More details here: > > > > https://centos.org/stream9/ > > I installed CentOS 9 Stream on Nov 17 as a VM. (VMware note: to > install from the DVD ISO, you must use UEFI boot and the "Secure" > option must be deselected.) > > I did a quick summary of some of the packages that are important to us > at work; obviously, our work priorities may not align with your needs, > but you might find the list useful in case you're interested in CentOS > itself or in what RHEL 9 or its clones (Oracle, Rocky, etc) is likely > to resemble: Thanks for doing this! It's a good overview. > Base OS: > * glibc 2.34 > * kernel 5.14.0 > * openssh 8.7p1 > * openssl 3.0.3 > * python3 3.9.8 > * samba 4.14.5 > > AppStream: > * Bacula 11.0.1 > * gcc 11.2.1 > * httpd 2.4.48 > * java 8, java 11, java 17 > * mariadb 10.5.12 > * mysql 8.0.22 > * nginx 1.20.1 > * openmpi 4.1.1 > * perl 5.32.1 + all modules > * php 8.0.6 > * postgresql 13.3 > * python3 modules > > Of note: java, perl and ruby are entirely streams now, while python > remains tied to the base OS. All RDBMS releases are streams. There is > no Tomcat! libgcc is part of the base OS but is also a stream. I'm not > sure how that will work. I can clarify that a bit. We have Application Streams and separately the AppStream repo. The AppStream repo contains the Application Streams, but it also contains things that are still part of the standard OS that aren't what we'd consider "Base" or "core". In RHEL 8, the actual Application Streams are listed here: https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhel8-app-streams-life-cycle We'll have a similar page for RHEL 9 when that is released, but your list of languages and RDBMS in CentOS Stream 9 is a good start. Also, the python language stack will be slightly different in 9. We still have a system python (platform-python in RHEL8/CentOS Stream 8), which is python 3.9 but the packaging format is a more traditional RPM packaging. The same concept applies to the system level gcc, and therefore libgcc. RHEL 8 does not include Tomcat either, so that is not new. > As of yesterday, "dnf module list" is pretty sparse. I assume that > will change over time. Yes, it will change over time. josh > So far, my overall impression is that it behaves not too differently > from EL8/CentOS 8. > > -- > Paul Heinlein > heinl...@madboa.com > 45.38° N, 122.59° W > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Introducing CentOS Stream 9
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:51 PM Paul Heinlein wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2021, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Josh, > > Thank you for the reply! I'm still poking around Stream 9, trying to > devise some site-specific configuration-management rules, so I > appreciate all the information I can get. > > >> Of note: java, perl and ruby are entirely streams now, while python > >> remains tied to the base OS. All RDBMS releases are streams. There > >> is no Tomcat! libgcc is part of the base OS but is also a stream. > >> I'm not sure how that will work. > > > > I can clarify that a bit. We have Application Streams and > > separately the AppStream repo. The AppStream repo contains the > > Application Streams, but it also contains things that are still part > > of the standard OS that aren't what we'd consider "Base" or "core". > > Ah! I hadn't understood that distinction. Thanks for the > clarification. > > > We'll have a similar page for RHEL 9 when that is released, but your > > list of languages and RDBMS in CentOS Stream 9 is a good start. Also, > > the python language stack will be slightly different in 9. We still > > have a system python (platform-python in RHEL8/CentOS Stream 8), which > > is python 3.9 but the packaging format is a more traditional RPM > > packaging. The same concept applies to the system level gcc, and > > therefore libgcc. > > Does that mean there might be, say, a python310 or gcc12 stream? Version specifics aside, yes there will be newer python and gcc (called gcc-toolset in RHEL 8) Application Streams in the future. They won't exist for every upstream release, but selected versions will be included. josh > > RHEL 8 does not include Tomcat either, so that is not new. > > Heh. I guess I should have looked at that. None of our internal Tomcat > users have yet moved to EL8. > > -- > Paul Heinlein > heinl...@madboa.com > 45.38° N, 122.59° W > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is CentOS-Stream-9-20211222.0 suitable for building for RHEL9
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 4:15 AM Simon Matter wrote: > > > On 1/5/22 05:06, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote: > >> Am 05.01.22 um 11:02 schrieb Simon Matter: > >>> Hi, > >>> I have to port/build quite a number of packages for upcoming RHEL9. I > thought about starting to do so now on CentOS-Stream-9-20211222.0 in > the > >>> hope that I don't have to redo a lot of the work again later for the > released RHEL9. > >>> Does it sound like a good idea to start now or should I better wait a > bit? > >> I'm already doing that. Do just expect everything that also happened in > EL8. Missing devel or sub packages. Striped down s/rpm macros that > blocks building fedora packages directly. So, business as usual. BTW, > some packages are not in streams anymore. This makes custom > overlay > >> repos a bit easier ... > > I think you can build directly against the repos in the centos stream koji. > > https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/kojifiles/ > > We're not using koji so I don't know how I could make use of these repos. > > I've done a number of the easier builds now and they went well. Now I'm > trying to build a package which requires imake but I can't find it > anywhere. > > I guess imake could be missing because the Xorg stuff is being built > without it today? > > Does anybody know if imake is still used but not shipped or is it not used > and built for EL9 anymore? imake is not included in EL9 at all. It could be packaged and added to EPEL9 for those interested in doing so. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Is CentOS-Stream-9-20211222.0 suitable for building for RHEL9
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 8:59 AM Simon Matter wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 4:15 AM Simon Matter > > wrote: > >> > >> > On 1/5/22 05:06, Leon Fauster via CentOS wrote: > >> >> Am 05.01.22 um 11:02 schrieb Simon Matter: > >> >>> Hi, > >> >>> I have to port/build quite a number of packages for upcoming RHEL9. > >> I > >> thought about starting to do so now on CentOS-Stream-9-20211222.0 in > >> the > >> >>> hope that I don't have to redo a lot of the work again later for the > >> released RHEL9. > >> >>> Does it sound like a good idea to start now or should I better wait > >> a > >> bit? > >> >> I'm already doing that. Do just expect everything that also happened > >> in > >> EL8. Missing devel or sub packages. Striped down s/rpm macros that > >> blocks building fedora packages directly. So, business as usual. BTW, > >> some packages are not in streams anymore. This makes custom > >> overlay > >> >> repos a bit easier ... > >> > I think you can build directly against the repos in the centos stream > >> koji. > >> > https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/kojifiles/ > >> > >> We're not using koji so I don't know how I could make use of these > >> repos. > >> > >> I've done a number of the easier builds now and they went well. Now I'm > >> trying to build a package which requires imake but I can't find it > >> anywhere. > >> > >> I guess imake could be missing because the Xorg stuff is being built > >> without it today? > >> > >> Does anybody know if imake is still used but not shipped or is it not > >> used > >> and built for EL9 anymore? > > > > imake is not included in EL9 at all. It could be packaged and added > > to EPEL9 for those interested in doing so. > > So, can we expect that what is included in baseos+appstream+crb is what > will be available in RHEL9? Yes, the packages that are present in CentOS Stream 9 repositories reflect what will be available in RHEL 9 when it is released. That's one of the main purposes of CentOS Stream :) We're still developing and changing before the first release so there will be some flux, but I don't expect anything drastic at this point. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kernel live patching on CentOS Stream 9
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 1:36 PM Kenneth Porter wrote: > > On 1/7/2022 10:07 AM, Brian Stinson wrote: > > - We do not provide patch files in CentOS Stream (or previously in > > CentOS Linux, for that matter). We've always recommended RHEL as a > > better fit for folks that have hard requirements on this sort of > > workflow. > > If Stream is to be the next RHEL, wouldn't you want to test this kind of > thing so the RHEL subscribers don't have to? RHEL tests live patches for released, supported kernels before they are delivered to customers. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Kernel live patching on CentOS Stream 9
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 2:13 PM Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > > > On 1/13/22 1:01 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote: > > On 1/13/22 09:32, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > >> In layman's language summary: RedHat Enterprise features (including > >> "live" kernel patching) are to be expected _only_ in RedHat Enterprise > >> "binary replica" distributions, which CentOS Stream is not. > > > > > > I don't think that's true, exactly. As far as I know, rebuild > > distributions never had the "Enterprise" features*. Critically, I think > > that a lot of people mistakenly believed that CentOS *did* have > > Enterprise features, because it was rebuilt from RHEL code, and that > > misunderstanding underlies a great deal of the negative response toward > > CentOS Stream. > > > > Thanks for correcting my layman's representation. It should have better > said that "binary replica" is "binary compatible" in a sense whatever > software distributed as binary for RHEL will work the same on "binary > replica". I guess my views and wordings got skewed by latest changes of > CentOS paradigms. > > > > > *: "Enterprise" features include but are not limited to: > > > > 1. Minor releases with independent life cycles / Extended Update Support > > 2. Classification for updates (security, bugfix, enhancement) > > 3. Live patching for kernel security vulnerabilities > > We never had it in CentOS in the past, but I'm just curious: is live > patching proprietary piece of RHEL? I know there are several solutions, > way back there was paid one called splice, my Boss's son was one of the > developers of that. Just curious, as, if it is paid, it is stripped off > as part of CentOS composition, but if it is not paid, open source, then > it would "just work", or not? RHEL's kernel live patching uses upstream open source kpatch. The sources to the kpatches are delivered in customer facing CDN repos at the same time as the kpatch itself. We do not use proprietary code to produce or apply the kpatches. I can only speculate on whether RHEL kpatches would work on a CentOS kernel, but my assumption is that they would not due to how they are signed. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS 9 and gtk-spice
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:05 AM Joshua Kramer wrote: > > Hello- > > Before I open a bug report on this, I wanted to ask if there is a specific > reason that spice-gtk is not in the OS repositories of EL9? It looks like > I have to install the ovirt repositories before I get access to spice-gtk > and its dependencies. spice was deprecated in RHEL 8 and removed in RHEL 9. https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/html/8.4_release_notes/deprecated_functionality josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] modules maintenance
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 11:03 AM Valere Binet wrote: > > Hi, > > Are the default modules receiving security update? Generally speaking, yes. > Security tools (Tenable) want me to update PHP to 7.4 claiming > 7.2.24-1.module_el8.2.0+313+b04d0a66 has several vulnerabilities per > CESA-2021:4213, CESA-2022:1935. > > Same with containers-common. Tenable wants 1.2.4-1.module_el8.6.0 rather > than 1-23.module_el8.7.0+1106+45480ee0 even though both have the same > 2022-03-16 date in the repo. (CESA-2022:1793, CESA-2022:2143). > > I don't find any centos-announce email mentioning the above CESA. Are the > updates for the modules published separately? Where can I find them? CentOS does not publish CVE metadata. If you are a RHEL customer, we have a suite of approved security scanners that understand how to use the CVE metadata published as part of RHEL. I don't know if Tenable is in that set, but often we find many scanners do not understand that most CVE fixes in CentOS Stream and RHEL are managed via backports instead of version bumps or they don't know how to handle the metadata we publish. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] LibreOffice on CentOS 7
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022, 5:05 PM H wrote: > I am running the default version of LibreOffice 5.3.6.1 on CentOS 7. This > is quite an old version and has a serious bug in Calc, possibly an errant > pointer, that frequently locks up spreadsheets. > > Has anyone installed a later version of LO on CentOS 7? I would prefer a > version that is not flatpak, snap or appimage etc... > Could you elaborate why you would like to avoid those packaging formats? josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] centos 8-Streams kernel?
On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 3:58 PM Aleksandar Ivanisevic wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone know what is happening with centos 8-Streams kernel? > It has been behind RHEL for months now, RHEL8.7 has 4.18.0-425.3.1.el8 built > in December and Streams has 4.18.0-408.el8 built all the way back in end > October. Is there some policy somewhere that I missed that says that 9 will > be now getting the focus or whatnot? No, there's been no change in policy. I'm inquiring about this. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos Stream 9 module list
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 10:08 AM Jos Vos wrote: > > Hi, > > When I do "dnf module list --all" on CentOS Stream 8, I also see the > stream versions installed by default, e.g. postgresql 10. > > But on CentOS Stream 9, I only see the newer stream version, like > postgresql 15 and nodejs 18 (and not postgresql 13 and nodejs 16). > > Can anyone explain what's happening here? Modules are one of several packaging formats we have. With CentOS Stream 9/ RHEL 9, we took user and customer feedback on how the default versions of software are packaged and determined that the defaults should be normal RPMs. Newer and alternative versions of software will be delivered as modules in some cases, or as regular RPMs with applicable versioning in others. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Centos Stream 9 module list
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 3:18 PM Gionatan Danti wrote: > > Il 2023-01-12 16:10 Josh Boyer ha scritto: > > Modules are one of several packaging formats we have. With CentOS > > Stream 9/ RHEL 9, we took user and customer feedback on how the > > default versions of software are packaged and determined that the > > defaults should be normal RPMs. Newer and alternative versions of > > software will be delivered as modules in some cases, or as regular > > RPMs with applicable versioning in others. > > > > josh > > Hi Josh, > can I ask the rationale behind this decision? > > It seems "strange" to have some different version in the main repos, > with versioned RPMs, and other in specific modules (which needs to be > manually enabled). There have been many discussions on modularity, both on this list and on lists like the epel and fedora devel lists, but I'll give a brief subset. Modularity provides parallel availability but not parallel installatability. Some software needs or perhaps wants to be parallel installable. Also, some upstream language stacks such as python have implemented parallel availability/installability inherently in their framework, which eliminates the need for modules. Ultimately, the Red Hat teams are using modularity where they believe it makes sense and using regular packaging to reduce complexity for customers where it doesn't provide much benefit. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] centos 8-Streams kernel?
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 5:43 PM Steven Rosenberg wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 7:34 AM Johnny Hughes wrote: > > > > > One thing to note is, we are currently working on moving the c8s process > > to use the same workflow as the c9s process. That will happen later > > this year. Right now, I only build what releases to git.centos.org for > > the c8s branch for the kernel. They are looking to get me a new kernel > > now. > > > > Excellent news! Thank you. In the meantime, an updated kernel is now available in the CentOS Stream 8 repositories. Thank you to the team for working through that. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] thunderbird-102.7.1-1.el8 breaks OAuth authentication
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 10:26 AM Orion Poplawski wrote: > > On 2/14/23 08:49, Orion Poplawski wrote: > > On 1/29/23 11:24, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> It seems that thunderbird-102.7.1-1.el8 (at least on CentOS Stream) broke > >> OAuth authentication with outlook.office365.com. Downgrading to > >> 102.4.0-1.el8 resolved the issue. > >> > >> Error console reports: > >> > >> XHR POST https://login.microsoftonline.com/common/oauth2/v2.0/token > >> [HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request 293ms] > > > > This has been fixed in RHEL8 with 102.7.1-2, but this has not yet made it to > > CentOS Stream 8. When can we expect to see that? > > It also does not appear to have made it to CentOS 7 yet either. The team is working on some other issues at the moment. Your patience is appreciated. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How will fragmentation help Red Hat
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 6:13 AM Simon Matter wrote: > > Hi, > > As I found out yesterday, the fragmentation of the "Enterprise Linux" > ecosystem just started to come true. I expect this is only the beginning > and Red Hat may also start to completely hold back sources of non GPL > software which is part of the "Enterprise Linux" ecosystem. > > I'm really wondering, how will this help anybody and how will this help > Red Hat in the long run? Competition in the Enterprise Linux space is a good thing. If a company or community other than Red Hat starts serving a market that RHEL can't, it forces Red Hat to evaluate and adjust. It keeps everyone pushing and developing solutions that hopefully benefit end users and customers. If everyone is fully participating in open source and upstream, it makes them all better inherently. > I've been using and promoting the Red Hat "(Enterprise) Linux" ecosystem > for more than two decades. But, who will I promote in the future if this > ecosystem becomes fragmented? Is it different from the non-Enterprise Linux ecosystem? What do you do there given the large variety of Linux distributions? My personal take on this is to think about what I use and why I use it. How does something solve my needs? Does it need to be better? etc. For example, long before I ever worked at Red Hat I was a Fedora Linux user. I love that project and distribution. I literally owe my career in some part to it. In recent years, I don't use Fedora heavily. Partly because of my day job, but also partly because my personal needs changed. I do still install almost every release in some way and try it out though. If someone asked me for a recommendation on a community Linux distribution, it would still be at the top of my list. Not because of what it was like in the past, but because of what Fedora is today which is far better than it ever has been. If someone asked me for a recommendation on an Enterprise Linux operating system, I'd say RHEL. Yes of course because I work on it, but also because I firmly believe it is the best on the market. It's what I run on my main machine every day. If someone asked for a community Enterprise Linux project, I'd suggest CentOS Stream because of the direct ties to RHEL, but also because I believe it's a relatively young and growing project with a lot of potential to do really interesting things. However, I would probably ask what their needs were and then I'd earnestly try to make a recommendation based on that. > I'm still trying to find answers but it's quite difficult. It is. It's difficult for an individual to decide, and it's difficult for a project or company to continuously push themselves to make sure they are the best option for the broadest number of users. > How do others, who were using and promoting the Red Hat "Enterprise Linux" > ecosystem, handle this new situation? Respectfully, I don't think it's new. We've had RHEL, SLES, OEL, CentOS Linux and Ubuntu for more than a decade. Rocky, Alma, whatever SUSE's new RHEL fork is, etc are certainly newer but the situation itself is not new. I see it as an expansion of options, but the same set of considerations still applies. Which distribution and community aligns best with your needs, goals, and beliefs? Which one would you tell your friend to use? For me, it's still Fedora, CentOS Stream, and RHEL. josh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How will fragmentation help Red Hat
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 8:11 AM mario juliano grande-balletta wrote: > > IMHO, there are insider politically correct opinions about the recent > changes and then, there are the individual opinions of community > members, end-users and the general public. > > IMHO, if you work for RedHat (IBM) your opinion could be slightly > biased because of your career. I agree and acknowledge there is bias for employees. Most of us try very hard to be aware of it and think critically through it, but it does exist. > But, the history of open source is full of examples of what happens > when corporations try to create commodities from distributions backed > by support contracts. > > IBM wants to make money, PERIOD. They paid billions for RedHat and > investors, executives, want ROI and profit, period. No excuses. > > So, they are locking down RedHat and closing channels to important > software/materials. It is what companies do all the time. I will politely point out that your implication that IBM had direct input into Red Hat's recent announcements is an assumption on your part and not based on facts. > I predict a decline in sales, a decrease in subscriptions and a > percentage of the community moving away from Fedora / CentOS. > > It's only logical reaction. > > Does IBM deserve to make a profit for buying RedHat? Yes, indeed. > > However, this is not the best way, it is the same mentality of > Microsoft, Oracle and others whose products are EASILY replaced and out > performed by open source community software. > > IBM has had many successes over the years, many first innovations, but > also a history of mistakes and flops too! This is a flop. I'm failing to see how this email helps further the conversation that Simon started in earnest. I think Simon asks good questions and it's worth a discussion. If your suggestion is to not recommend Red Hat distributions, what would you recommend instead and why? josh > -Original Message- > From: Josh Boyer > Reply-To: CentOS mailing list > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] How will fragmentation help Red Hat > Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 07:20:50 -0400 > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 6:13 AM Simon Matter > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > As I found out yesterday, the fragmentation of the "Enterprise Linux" > > ecosystem just started to come true. I expect this is only the > > beginning > > and Red Hat may also start to completely hold back sources of non GPL > > software which is part of the "Enterprise Linux" ecosystem. > > > > I'm really wondering, how will this help anybody and how will this > > help > > Red Hat in the long run? > > Competition in the Enterprise Linux space is a good thing. If a > company or community other than Red Hat starts serving a market that > RHEL can't, it forces Red Hat to evaluate and adjust. It keeps > everyone pushing and developing solutions that hopefully benefit end > users and customers. If everyone is fully participating in open > source and upstream, it makes them all better inherently. > > > I've been using and promoting the Red Hat "(Enterprise) Linux" > > ecosystem > > for more than two decades. But, who will I promote in the future if > > this > > ecosystem becomes fragmented? > > Is it different from the non-Enterprise Linux ecosystem? What do you > do there given the large variety of Linux distributions? > > My personal take on this is to think about what I use and why I use > it. How does something solve my needs? Does it need to be better? > etc. > > For example, long before I ever worked at Red Hat I was a Fedora Linux > user. I love that project and distribution. I literally owe my > career in some part to it. In recent years, I don't use Fedora > heavily. Partly because of my day job, but also partly because my > personal needs changed. I do still install almost every release in > some way and try it out though. If someone asked me for a > recommendation on a community Linux distribution, it would still be at > the top of my list. Not because of what it was like in the past, but > because of what Fedora is today which is far better than it ever has > been. > > If someone asked me for a recommendation on an Enterprise Linux > operating system, I'd say RHEL. Yes of course because I work on it, > but also because I firmly believe it is the best on the market. It's > what I run on my main machine every day. If someone asked for a > community Enterprise Linux project, I'd suggest CentOS Stream because > of the direct ties to RHEL, but also because I believe it's a > relatively young and gr
