rocky linux Vs Debian

jnd

@reimuoao said:

@JosephF said:
Why?

It's all about the hype. Previously, the pinnacle of Linux distribution hype was Arch Linux, fueled by the "I use Arch, BTW" meme. But its growing popularity gradually eroded the exclusivity.

Now, NixOS has taken its place. Its higher barrier to entry has created a another level of exclusivity, making it the new flex for CS undergrad kids to signaling their tech cred/taste.

Arch was getting popular 20 years ago because it suited all the advanced users who had the time to learn use Linux on it's own with minimum of default helpers or preinstalled software, beginning with the installation process. It was one step behind Gentoo because you didn't need to compile and optimize everything to your specific hardware.

Arch is still cool and popular today because we got series of forks, from more user friendly like EndeavourOS (currently my favorite) to DHH's Ruby development distro to gaming optimized SteamOS. When you think about it it's the set of pacman, AUR (+ helpers), Wiki and general DIY community that kept it popular and successful for so long.

Although I'm a long term Arch user for PC use I rather quickly ended up with Debian on servers. Because I don't have to deal with rolling release frequent updates, ease of use, ease of upgrade, vast collection of software and any remotely popular app usual has some kind of .deb repo or builds that you can readily install and integrate. And it's stable as Linux can be.

schenleyssy2

I choose Debian 12

tunatech

There's not much of a difference in production between the two, both are very reliable and stable, just use the one you're more familiar with.

buggedout

@angstrom said:

@buggedout said:
I would go with Debian, its simply best and free. If I was compelled to use RHEL based distros I would either go with RHEL itself or Alma! I don't like rocky!!

Rocky Linux is operated by the Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation, which is a for profit Public Benefit Corporation and is solely owned by Gregory Kurtzer. This ownership structure means that, unlike AlmaLinux (which is governed by a community nonprofit), Rocky Linux has a single owner who technically could make unilateral decisions about the project or its direction.

Could you say what the source of this quote is?

You can try surfing the web.
https://www.resf.org/about
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Enterprise_Software_Foundation

You can also read this:
https://hackernoon.com/the-case-against-rocky-linux

nszerver

Windows 98 and Windows 95

noisycode

Ubuntu 24.04 is my favorite now. Nothing special, just easy to use with a looooong enough lifecycle. I don't like to upgrade distros from time to time, I mean, at all.

rcy026

@jnd said:

@niranjan81 said:
When it comes to stability, isn't FreeBSD more stable than debian or RHEL?
The learning is steeper, and thats the investment one has to consider, but in comparison I think FreeBSD is the most stable and production ready. Please corrct me if I am wrong.

How do you measure that? I tried FreeBSD about year ago, there's not much going for it. The update process is slow and painful, the ecosystem is smaller than your popular Linux distro like Debian, the structure is kinda dated. BSD systems became very niche, perhaps used only by the people who have a lot of experience with it and use it because of nostalgia rather than anything else.

I wouldn't really agree here.
BSD's are not really meant for "everyday use" by individuals, so yes, I can see how things like the update process can seem a bit slow and cumbersome. And yes, the ecosystem is smaller, BSD does not run the latest and greatest whatever niche software and it does not have all the bells and whistles. If that is what you are looking for, use something else.
But BSD's are extremely effective when used correctly and their licensing allows them to be used in proprietary software without GPL poisoning. Big players like Netflix, Citrix, Checkpoint, NetApp, Juniper, Whatsapp etc all run their appliances and software on BSD.