Re: question regarding the future
On 4/28/19 11:03 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 02:15:42PM +0200, Maarten wrote: Hello fellow SL users, I having been using SL for a while now, ... there will be no SL8... the future [?] I look at the future throught the mirror of today's problems. And today's problems in the RH/CentOS/SL universe do not project a bright sunny future: - systemd is a mess up. with luck IBM's purchase will clean house on this one. I'm pretty sure any chance of systemd being replaced any time soon is vanishingly small. Embrace it, file bugs, move on with life. - c++, cmake, python, php, etc are always 1-2 versions behind those required by packages we need to use This has been a problem inherent with "Enterprise" distributions that value stability over new features. That said, I've found that RHEL7 has been much more aggressive with updates (sometimes annoyingly so) that EL6 was. Also, with modules in EL8 hopefully this will be much better. - ZFS is not part of the base system, does not play well with kernel updates - NIS will be removed in el8, with no replacement (LDAP need not apply unless they sorted out handling of autofs maps) NIS, seriously? FWIW - I use autofs with LDAP (by way of IPA) extensively without issue. - incoming mess up of X11 via Wayland graphics This does not seem tied to any one particular distribution, unless there are some trying to avoid Wayland altogether? Though I can't imagine that being viable for long. On the data analysis side we are married to CERN via the ROOT data analysis package, and the vibes I get from ROOT developers is that CERN Linux 7 (CentOS7) is not their primary target. (for example we had a problem with ROOT graphics where ROOT's LLVM collided with LLVM inside the el7 OpenGL library. For sure, Mesa has it fixed "in the latest version", but for us running vanilla CentOS7, nothing worked. And still does not work, the best I know). So it looks like we will be looking at Linuxes other than RH/CentOS, especially if a popular systemd-free variant somehow emerges. A move to Ubuntu is quite likely just because it tends to have recently recent c++, python, php & co. P.S. What's the beef with systemd? Apart from sundry bugs (for example, sometimes it does not respect the startup order specified in the unit files), we have been forced to disable all automatic updates (usually a nightly cron job). This is because an update of the systemd package triggers/forces the restart of every system service (nis, nfs, autofs, etc), effectively a reboot of the machine (minus rebooting of the linux kernel). Not a nice thing to happen on production machines on random nights whenever updated systemd is pushed out (usally 2-3 times a year). Of course in our experience, about 50% of the time something goes wrong and one of the services restarted by the systemd update does not restart correctly yielding a dead machine. Rant over. I run with automatic updates and have never seen a systemd update force a restart of every system service. -- Orion Poplawski Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane or...@nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: question regarding the future
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 02:15:42PM +0200, Maarten wrote: > Hello fellow SL users, > I having been using SL for a while now, ... > there will be no SL8... > the future [?] I look at the future throught the mirror of today's problems. And today's problems in the RH/CentOS/SL universe do not project a bright sunny future: - systemd is a mess up. with luck IBM's purchase will clean house on this one. - c++, cmake, python, php, etc are always 1-2 versions behind those required by packages we need to use - ZFS is not part of the base system, does not play well with kernel updates - NIS will be removed in el8, with no replacement (LDAP need not apply unless they sorted out handling of autofs maps) - incoming mess up of X11 via Wayland graphics On the data analysis side we are married to CERN via the ROOT data analysis package, and the vibes I get from ROOT developers is that CERN Linux 7 (CentOS7) is not their primary target. (for example we had a problem with ROOT graphics where ROOT's LLVM collided with LLVM inside the el7 OpenGL library. For sure, Mesa has it fixed "in the latest version", but for us running vanilla CentOS7, nothing worked. And still does not work, the best I know). So it looks like we will be looking at Linuxes other than RH/CentOS, especially if a popular systemd-free variant somehow emerges. A move to Ubuntu is quite likely just because it tends to have recently recent c++, python, php & co. P.S. What's the beef with systemd? Apart from sundry bugs (for example, sometimes it does not respect the startup order specified in the unit files), we have been forced to disable all automatic updates (usually a nightly cron job). This is because an update of the systemd package triggers/forces the restart of every system service (nis, nfs, autofs, etc), effectively a reboot of the machine (minus rebooting of the linux kernel). Not a nice thing to happen on production machines on random nights whenever updated systemd is pushed out (usally 2-3 times a year). Of course in our experience, about 50% of the time something goes wrong and one of the services restarted by the systemd update does not restart correctly yielding a dead machine. Rant over. -- Konstantin Olchanski Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada
RE: question regarding the future
Hi I moved from CentOS 5 to SL6 when I urgently needed version 6 for some of its new features, and CentOS didn't get their act together for a few months. I stayed with SL because of the extremely helpful, caring people who made up the team as well as those on the mailing lists. It seemed a logical move for Fermilab to move to CentOS after CERN did that a while back. CentOS has matured since then and I do not see RedHat or IBM as threats, especially since Fermilab, CERN, et. al. will be helping to improve the product. If anything does go awry in the future, I do not see major science institutions sitting back and doing nothing about it. Maybe even SL would then arise again? Call it Phoenix? Anyway, I am now looking forward to CentOS 8. Are we there yet? Cheers from an old-timer, with less than 2 cents left to contribute. Bill -Original message- > From:Maarten > Sent: Sunday 28th April 2019 3:55 > To: scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov > Subject: Re: question regarding the future > > I still find it uncertain of what might happen in the future, changes > can take more then a couple of years to develop. > Also with IBM having bought Redhat the future can still be uncertain, > IBM is not known for their opensource projects. > Yes with Fermilab, CERN and other labs deciding to go with CentOS > chances are increased of CentOS staying the way > it us, but Redhat and IBM remains a companies and companies are driven > by increasing their profit. Just my two cents ;) > > On 4/27/19 7:18 PM, Steven Haigh wrote: > > I think this misses the point. > > > > SL was a major 'security blanket' for the uncertainty that was > > happening with RedHat essentially taking control of CentOS. People > > were not sure which way things were going to go, so SL filled the gap. > > > > As time has passed, RedHat has done the right thing so far with CentOS > > - and a lot of people are less nervous as a result. > > > > I understand the decision not to do an SL8 - as the environment is > > pretty settled again and it is much clearer how this will run. It's > > better to utilise those resources on a more internal focus. > > > > The threat of CentOS disappearing is gone, so most people will > > probably pick up CentOS 8 when it comes around to it. > > Steven Haigh > > > > net...@crc.id.au > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.crc.id.au=DwIFaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=bxSPoSV3klZdWvNSRY1MzfipTnfuVcJ-eFb3mV2ht3A=z13E-77e2i9E3Fd3_dgZfCfqJPga60K5Jdz9WOj_qIA= > > +61 (3) 9001 6090 0412 935 897 > > > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 1:08 AM, John Holmes > > wrote: > >> Try Springdale Linux (formerly PUIAS), it was started long before > >> CentOS. > >> PU-IAS = Princeton University - Institute for Advanced Study > >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__springdale.math.ias.edu_=DwIDaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=wP65fR-SDNTSPXnXaiYwSUdkmZtorgLfyxLkJX73d1U=GCfR5v9kjH_NGH0--yMHNpy_l708MANUmXBGhyDJIBw= > >> > >> > >> > >> On 27/04/2019 14:15, Maarten wrote: > >>> Hello fellow SL users, > >>> > >>> I having been using SL for a while now, after the CentOS project > >>> became > >>> part of Redhat > >>> I was glad that I was using SL because I would think that CentOS would > >>> become a middle > >>> testing ground for Redhat to test new things, getting the idea SL > >>> would > >>> stay closer to the > >>> source since it just being another clone. Now that it has been > >>> announced > >>> that there will > >>> be no SL8, what's the best clone to switch to after EOL of SL6 and > >>> SL7. > >>> Even though > >>> Redhat says that CentOS will never be used as a testing ground or > >>> switch how they are > >>> doing things, I do not believe what they say now will be the same > >>> in the > >>> future. > > > > > >
