Re: Rocky Linux
I will probably be more like to go for Springdale Linux since they've been around since before CentOS, I find it hard to put trust in a project that's just getting started unless of course CERN changes their decision about discontinuing Scientific Linux since they were migrating to CentOS. On 12/10/20 5:17 AM, ~Stack~ wrote: On 12/9/20 9:16 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: One thing does concern me: having left CentOS (it was all "volunteer" effort at that epoch as I recall) for SL, a primary motivator was that SL had professional (employed, not volunteer) persons doing the distros, and this SL list amounting to support. If Rocky is to be all volunteer, how reliable and professional will it be? This is not a minor issue, as very few enthusiasts or other non-professionals provide a truly reliable deliverable. I would say, give it time. It wouldn't be the first time Kurtzer started an open source project and turned into a company. :-) For my use, is EL going to continue to be workstation friendly (e.g., laptop in which one cannot pick and choose to integrate only Linux traditionally supported controllers with appropriate drivers, such as sound "cards", but is stuck with whatever the laptop vendor has used -- typically MS Win "supported") or is it primarily a server distro? Ubuntu LTS still seems to be laptop friendly. They are aiming for complete RHEL reproducibility. If the goal is to be as-true-as-possible-RHEL variant then the answer would be in how you use RHEL. But do give it sometime. It's only been two days and the announcement I just saw said that there are now 750 people actively participating in the various forms to communication and they have direction, a plan, and leaders making it happen. And there's thousands of people who have noticed and are talking about it on /. , reddit, lwn, ect. That's pretty impressive and it speaks volumes about the number of people who really do want a true-to-RHEL variant. ~Stack~
Re: Rocky Linux
On 12/9/20 9:16 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: One thing does concern me: having left CentOS (it was all "volunteer" effort at that epoch as I recall) for SL, a primary motivator was that SL had professional (employed, not volunteer) persons doing the distros, and this SL list amounting to support. If Rocky is to be all volunteer, how reliable and professional will it be? This is not a minor issue, as very few enthusiasts or other non-professionals provide a truly reliable deliverable. I would say, give it time. It wouldn't be the first time Kurtzer started an open source project and turned into a company. :-) For my use, is EL going to continue to be workstation friendly (e.g., laptop in which one cannot pick and choose to integrate only Linux traditionally supported controllers with appropriate drivers, such as sound "cards", but is stuck with whatever the laptop vendor has used -- typically MS Win "supported") or is it primarily a server distro? Ubuntu LTS still seems to be laptop friendly. They are aiming for complete RHEL reproducibility. If the goal is to be as-true-as-possible-RHEL variant then the answer would be in how you use RHEL. But do give it sometime. It's only been two days and the announcement I just saw said that there are now 750 people actively participating in the various forms to communication and they have direction, a plan, and leaders making it happen. And there's thousands of people who have noticed and are talking about it on /. , reddit, lwn, ect. That's pretty impressive and it speaks volumes about the number of people who really do want a true-to-RHEL variant. ~Stack~
Rocky Linux
Greetings, Greg Kurtzer (the guy who started Caos which became CentOS, and he is also the guy who started Warewulf and Singularity), has announced Rocky Linux. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__rockylinux.org_=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=PcjfmOcTIXtiyJX8e4EjgVJf_0n7OjIkGzXbVXvtmIg=unWm5JFUE__5nWPA8pEHmO3aCjkyrMeVFRQp2XtnnaQ= It's aiming to be the replacement for a community backed EL8 distro. And wow, has he gotten support. It's blowing up on the slack page with people wanting to help. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__hpcng.slack.com=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=PcjfmOcTIXtiyJX8e4EjgVJf_0n7OjIkGzXbVXvtmIg=d5aX1hYZZmDZqWcoQLlqK_HhvOCvJ1iUa_92XhVJa4I= I think you can get an invite through the links on the rockylinux page. I'm sure if any of the Scientific Linux team wanted to throw some pointers over to the group it would be very appreciated. As would any support/help from those who want to see a solid EL8 clone. :-) Thanks! ~Stack~
Re: Dose any of this surprize you.
A note: On 12/9/20 11:05 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 10:25:36AM -0500, Larry Linder wrote: Everytime I am forced to use Windows 10 my neurons rebel at the moron aware SW. I am sorry you are in the position where you are forced to use Windows, I feel lucky that I can "just say no!". For those of us who must work in the "real world", unfortunately many applications have no work alike for Linux, but typically proprietary licensed for fee applications only for MS Win and/or Mac OS X. Anything proprietary for Mac OS X is impossible to legally use in the USA and EU other than on an Apple (hardware) platform. I will not use a dual-boot system as this is both cumbersome and open to all sorts of compromises, particularly from MS Win. I have tried Cross-over (supported Wine), but it is too limited in the reliable support of current MS Win applications. I currently use MS Win 10 under both VMware Player and VirtualBox under, first, SL, and now Ubuntu LTS, as the platform I use did come with a MS Win license. Under this MS Win 10, I use proprietary applications not available for Linux. I also find MS Win 10 miserable and cumbersome, with a horrid and time consuming upgrade process (I experienced that because the current production release of an application I use required a later release of MS Win 10 than was on the virtual machine and I had to waste a day whilst MS Win 10 upgraded, rebooted, upgraded, rebooted, etc., but one does not have a choice. I do use LibreOffice and other workalikes. This problem is not new. When Sun was still a vendor and had desktop workstations with a Sparc platform, it was forced to introduce an add-on board with a X86 processor to run MS Win under Solaris so that such MS Win applications could be run, as many users did not want two desktop machines, a Sun for "real" work, and a MS Win box for "general use applications". Sun originally bought VirtualBox for this purpose once Sun had switched to a X86 hardware platform. Now of course this is all part of Oracle as the oligopolies increase. As the supporters of GNU retire and die off - the new generation has no desire to stay the course. This works both ways. I used to think Richard Stallman was a cook and a crank. Today I see his apocalyptic predictions for evils of "unfree" software come true (and then some) in the cell phone universe. If we live through covid, I may yet become an FSF card carrying member! (Likely with the Torvaldskist schismatic branchnicks who refuse to say "GNU/Linux"). The bright side is that there is no automatic self destruct mechanism in Linux so even when the official support is ended we can still user what we have but not be able to upgrade our applications. So true, if not for C++11, I would say "SL6 forever!". ... the cost of just dumping 50 systems and install new OS's and applications is beyond our budget. ... Even for people with deep pockets, administrative, logistics, downtime and man power costs make it impractical, except for "once every 5-10 years". People who just invested in a migration to el8 to be told now that they have to migrate again next year must be severely unhappy right now. I cannot fathom how Red Hat did not "ask around" before going public with their decision. (unless the decision was forced on them externally). So the sword had many sharp edges. Well, it is the dull sword that is most dangerous (to the user). Join your local Iaido club and find out for yourself.
Re: CentOS 8 EOL; CentOS Stream?
If my recollection of the history is correct, CentOS and Princeton EL were separate from SL. CentOS originally was a "volunteer" effort building from RHEL source, with RH personnel monitoring the CentOS "lists" because CentOS had a wider range of an installed base on enthusiast and home user systems, in addition to "professional" systems (such as the HP Zbook laptop workstation that I use). The earlier SL major releases had some differences in the base installed system from EL "stock", whereas CentOS did not. Later major releases of SL essentially were the same in the "base" as EL (in all cases, logos must change). I never worked with the Princeton release. When RH (not Fedora -- real production RH) was an executable installable supported distro, pre-EL, we used that, licensed for free for "personal" use. Prior to RH, I was using Debian (the GNU Linux), and once RH had no executable installable supported distro, I switched to CentOS. I then switched to SL because CentOS was having issues and SL was professionally produced (Fermilab/CERN) with the level of professional support we needed (that is, this list, plus Fermilab SL support staff who would fix some things -- such as inconsistencies or missing components in the standard SL distro -- we do NOT need nor use "commercial cradle to grave" handholding support, unlike the University IT division for which everything essentially is outsourced to for-profit vendors, as part of the USA scheme for public funding of private for-profit entities and wealth transference to the wealthy. With the demise of SL 8 and the purchase of RH and CentOS by IBM, I switched to Ubuntu LTS. If Canonical goes the way of RH, then I suppose I will look at Debian again. On 12/9/20 10:47 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: Very curious how CERN and Fermilab will respond to this. I guess that CERN was caught red-handed as well. (wrong metaphor? you wanted "with pants down" or "off guard" or something like that? there is no evidence that CERN was "in" on this change, yes?) They have already started to port their internal systems to CentOS8 according to the recent site report at HEPiX: https://indico.cern.ch/event/898285/contributions/4015535/attachments/2120621/3569557/CERN_Site_Report_-_HEPiX_Autumn_2020_v2.pdf As one may remember, CERN Linux, SL and CentOS only exist because CERN could not agree with Red Hat on the licensing scheme for LHC-scale computing. (I guess, at the LHC scale, even small numbers like $1/license become unworkable). BTW, in other news, I see the CentOS wiki was changed to read "CentOS-8 full updates and Maintenance Updates" from "May 2024 and May 2029" to "December 2021 and December 31, 2021", see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.centos.org_action_recall_About_Product=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=eMvBVbBFwtBD5Xbw1LErGQIapxF_ioOOJoO-OqCNa6g=CaCDrxtp7Ka4fRCXAiVCT34Zxxx_VD19P2hQeMXliqs= and https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.centos.org_action_recall_About_Product-3Faction-3Drecall-26rev-3D122=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=eMvBVbBFwtBD5Xbw1LErGQIapxF_ioOOJoO-OqCNa6g=dx8Ilr6PNf35kZ8hodzZ5JC9z40X9p5iMktTifR_C34=
Re: Dose any of this surprize you.
On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 10:25:36AM -0500, Larry Linder wrote: > > Everytime I am forced to use Windows 10 my neurons rebel at the moron > aware SW. > I am sorry you are in the position where you are forced to use Windows, I feel lucky that I can "just say no!". > > As the supporters of GNU retire and die off - the new generation has no > desire to stay the course. > This works both ways. I used to think Richard Stallman was a cook and a crank. Today I see his apocalyptic predictions for evils of "unfree" software come true (and then some) in the cell phone universe. If we live through covid, I may yet become an FSF card carrying member! (Likely with the Torvaldskist schismatic branchnicks who refuse to say "GNU/Linux"). > > The bright side is that there is no automatic self destruct mechanism in > Linux so even when the official support is ended we can still user what > we have but not be able to upgrade our applications. > So true, if not for C++11, I would say "SL6 forever!". > > ... the cost of just dumping 50 systems and install new OS's and > applications is beyond our budget. ... > Even for people with deep pockets, administrative, logistics, downtime and man power costs make it impractical, except for "once every 5-10 years". People who just invested in a migration to el8 to be told now that they have to migrate again next year must be severely unhappy right now. I cannot fathom how Red Hat did not "ask around" before going public with their decision. (unless the decision was forced on them externally). > > So the sword had many sharp edges. > Well, it is the dull sword that is most dangerous (to the user). Join your local Iaido club and find out for yourself. -- 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: CentOS 8 EOL; CentOS Stream?
> > Very curious how CERN and Fermilab will respond to this. > I guess that CERN was caught red-handed as well. (wrong metaphor? you wanted "with pants down" or "off guard" or something like that? there is no evidence that CERN was "in" on this change, yes?) > They have already started to port their internal systems to CentOS8 according > to the > recent site report at HEPiX: > https://indico.cern.ch/event/898285/contributions/4015535/attachments/2120621/3569557/CERN_Site_Report_-_HEPiX_Autumn_2020_v2.pdf As one may remember, CERN Linux, SL and CentOS only exist because CERN could not agree with Red Hat on the licensing scheme for LHC-scale computing. (I guess, at the LHC scale, even small numbers like $1/license become unworkable). BTW, in other news, I see the CentOS wiki was changed to read "CentOS-8 full updates and Maintenance Updates" from "May 2024 and May 2029" to "December 2021 and December 31, 2021", see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.centos.org_action_recall_About_Product=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=m57TS8KUJogsGkZGVKvoL8D7gIzlEIxZsrqSEhDOgqk=eQQfaXijQiDmBJz_iRNxOctSQXnzptQdtMj7Xk8N340= and https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.centos.org_action_recall_About_Product-3Faction-3Drecall-26rev-3D122=DwIBAg=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=m57TS8KUJogsGkZGVKvoL8D7gIzlEIxZsrqSEhDOgqk=Hgd0S_7BGuuCKHIfyfpJaucFixwNwISvlHKpHhHwg4E= -- 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: Dose any of this surprize you.
If your employer is a for-profit entity, then the neo-liberal profiteer
model indicates your firm should be funding ("paying for") what it uses,
except for the neo-liberal reality of "welfare for the wealthy". As
your employer is using SL, supported from public funds in different
nations (e.g., the funders of Fermilab and CERN), perhaps assisting
setting up what would be in the USA a non-profit corporation for the
development, maintenance, and distribution (e.g., software download over
the Internet) of an "enterprise" production linux (or BSD, or ... ,
"unix" clone) would address what you describe below. This could
(should?) include various non-profit university partners. The entire
distro would be professionally developed and maintained with dedicated
professional (not amateur) staff, as is done at both Fermilab and CERN.
However, a university, or consortium thereof, cannot do this, at least
within the USA, because of the funding and revenue models. Given the
endowment of Harvard and/or Stanford in the USA, it is possible that
these entities internally could fund such a development. [Aside: It also
is likely that the PRC could (and probably) will fund such; however, any
application, firmware, etc., from the PRC owes primary allegiance, as
specified by PRC law, to the PRC totalitarian government through The
Party, and thus can only be used with great caution by those who do not
share such fealty. If you think IBM is arbitrary and capricious (as
evidenced by the CentOS reality), consider the dictates of the PRC
government.]
Outside of the conversion issues, for now, Ubuntu LTS seems to meet the
same niche as SL. There are other distros based upon Ubuntu (e.g.,
Mint), so there could be a SLubuntu that is based upon LTS. One thing I
personally would like is a LTS list that is the same as this SL list.
None of the "lists" that I have found for Ubuntu are equivalent to this
SL lists. I can elaborate upon the differences if there is any interest.
However, for SLubuntu or the like, some entity needs to provide the
level of professional staff that Fermilab/CERN provided for SL. Unlike
Fermilab that survives based upon the whim of the USA Federal government
(currently, Trump et al., decidedly pro-theocracy and anti-science, else
the USA would not be suffering from COVID-19 as it is and withdrawn from
the WHO, etc.), and may suffer the same fate as Arecibo (strictly a
matter of funding -- had the repairs and maintenance been done, rather
than "deferred maintenance", that facility would not have collapsed),
CERN appears to have a more stable funding source (by treaty or the
equivalent?). Very few if any USA universities have the same stable
funding.
Yasha Karant
On 12/9/20 7:25 AM, Larry Linder wrote:
In the early days of Windows 3.0 and OS/2. Windows 3.0 was short lived
because every user knew it was a dog.
OS/2 was pretty nice but had a fatel flaw as it only had one exit que.
i a program dies and not gracefully it was rebo0t time.
This is trivia trash but reflects on the Corporate Character of the
perpetrators.
RH 8 and Cent 8 should die quickly. The community with the support of a
stable university should restart SL.
Everytime I am forced to use Windows 10 my neurons rebel at the moron
aware SW.
If the linux community took a stable set of Linux and made 25 functional
improvement a year and I don't mean rearanging the fruniture or new eye
candy. Most of our computing OS nightmares would go away.
As an example I just opted to get a new version of VariCAD and during
installation it requested two different libc.SO's and a new C++
compiler.
Tor rebuild the libc.so for 2.15 took almost 20 minutes it worked. I
froze at rebuilding the C++ lib after looking at it.
One thing I learned from the people at "stackOverflow" was that 2.15 did
not contain all of 2.10 or 2.11 or 2.12. etc. The latest is 2.34. The
tangled web of good intentions is killing Linux.
Without the stability of RH most developers will flounder and sink. As
the supporters of GNU retire and die off - the new generation has no
desire to stay the course.
Without the long term stability the applicaions / CAD developers will
abandon it too.
The bright side is that there is no automatic self destruct mechanism in
Linux so even when the official support is ended we can still user what
we have but not be able to upgrade our applications.
We are a commercial user since SL 4. As a for profit organization the
cost of just dumping 50 systems and install new OS's and applications is
beyond our budget. A few new machines are introduced each year to
support engineering / development. Most are used in the shop / factory
as you would use a dish washer - just an appliance. The primary goal is
stability.
So the sword had many sharp edges.
My 2 Cents worth
Larry Linder
Dose any of this surprize you.
In the early days of Windows 3.0 and OS/2. Windows 3.0 was short lived because every user knew it was a dog. OS/2 was pretty nice but had a fatel flaw as it only had one exit que. i a program dies and not gracefully it was rebo0t time. This is trivia trash but reflects on the Corporate Character of the perpetrators. RH 8 and Cent 8 should die quickly. The community with the support of a stable university should restart SL. Everytime I am forced to use Windows 10 my neurons rebel at the moron aware SW. If the linux community took a stable set of Linux and made 25 functional improvement a year and I don't mean rearanging the fruniture or new eye candy. Most of our computing OS nightmares would go away. As an example I just opted to get a new version of VariCAD and during installation it requested two different libc.SO's and a new C++ compiler. Tor rebuild the libc.so for 2.15 took almost 20 minutes it worked. I froze at rebuilding the C++ lib after looking at it. One thing I learned from the people at "stackOverflow" was that 2.15 did not contain all of 2.10 or 2.11 or 2.12. etc. The latest is 2.34. The tangled web of good intentions is killing Linux. Without the stability of RH most developers will flounder and sink. As the supporters of GNU retire and die off - the new generation has no desire to stay the course. Without the long term stability the applicaions / CAD developers will abandon it too. The bright side is that there is no automatic self destruct mechanism in Linux so even when the official support is ended we can still user what we have but not be able to upgrade our applications. We are a commercial user since SL 4. As a for profit organization the cost of just dumping 50 systems and install new OS's and applications is beyond our budget. A few new machines are introduced each year to support engineering / development. Most are used in the shop / factory as you would use a dish washer - just an appliance. The primary goal is stability. So the sword had many sharp edges. My 2 Cents worth Larry Linder
Re: CentOS 8 EOL; CentOS Stream?
Am 09.12.20 um 01:39 schrieb Patrick J. LoPresti: > Very curious how CERN and Fermilab will respond to this. I guess that CERN was caught red-handed as well. They have already started to port their internal systems to CentOS8 according to the recent site report at HEPiX: https://indico.cern.ch/event/898285/contributions/4015535/attachments/2120621/3569557/CERN_Site_Report_-_HEPiX_Autumn_2020_v2.pdf Regards, Götz -- Götz Waschk° Phone: +49 33762 77169 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY ° Fax:+49 33762 77216 Platanenallee 6° E-Mail: goetz.was...@desy.de 15738 Zeuthen Germany smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Has ScientificLinux status changed?
Hello All, Last year it was announced that ScientificLinux would be discontinued because of CERN switching to CentOS and that they would contribute to the CentOS project instead of continuing with ScientificLinux. Yesterday it was announced that CentOS8 will be supported until the end of 2021 and that there won't be a CentOS9 meaning CentOS will become a rolling release a beta for RHEL and won't be binary compatible anymore. My question what is CERN going to do now that CentOS is not a realistic option anymore because of this? Is there any chance that the discontinued status of ScientificLinux will be reverted and that ScientificLinux will be an option as binary compatible clone of RHEL since CentOS Stream is out of the question since it won't be binary compatible anymore with RHEL. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__blog.centos.org_2020_12_future-2Dis-2Dcentos-2Dstream=DwICaQ=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A=W94IDcR13vDp6JcQ1GnDYXpReT891KGzNyoJ0RUeHGE=LPUFo2y0h01yepLOUsmUNGu9P7Y5t1lG8UwbkL4bvsM= Kind Regards, Maarten
