New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
As someone who worked (and still works) as a support guy for a number of companies, I've always seen Rocky among available templates but rarely have I seen someone actually using it.
Based on automatic installs on ExtraVM, just glancing over the VM list looks like around 75%~ of servers are running Ubuntu or Debian evenly split. The remaining are (10%~) CentOS 7, and the other 15% are a mix of Windows and Alma/Rocky. Of course there are some running things like BSD and some other niche options. I guess it would be cool to have a full statistic.
I personally use Almalinux primarily but use Rocky as well, they're basically interchangeable after all.
+Almalinux.
I've used both Rockylinux and Almalinux.
lmao yes, don't know how I mixed them up. thanks
So they are desperate to fight against the evils of IBM
I always stick with debian, but when its an RHEL derivative. I prefer Alma.
I saw this a few months back, on CLN website. https://blog.cloudlinux.com/cloudlinux-os-8-and-9-in-post-redhat-world
any insider secret sauce going on @MikePT ?
nvm:
Igor replied to a comment,
AlmaLinux for sure. No secrets. I left CloudLinux two weeks ago and joined rocket.net
Cheers!
Debian is the only Linux distro that actually exists.
The rest are bad rumors.
That's preposterous. You are basically saying that RH-types are for noobs.
Nothing further from the truth, I would say they are more Enterprise-centric because RHEL is Enterprise centric, the admins there don't have much of a choice, they have to use what the company's policy say they should use. The Enterprise SANs, routers, printers, industrial machinery, lab gear, the high end ones, while most have their own OSes have their documentation mostly for RHEL and are somehow optimized for that, integrated etc. There are many small things that are not tested in other distros or that are know to break because they simply rushed the product and only worked with the RHEL ecosystem. For most people it is hard to imagine running a RHEL-developed kind of control panel for industrial, medical etc. infrastructures in other ecosystems. It can be done, but it needs a lot of work, support, sometimes wrappers for different protocol implementations, communication and the like. Only someone who has to deal with this would be able to tell you in detail how much RHEL tries to lock you in.
As for the SELinux stuff... Seriously? Being forced into a CERTAIN type of a hardening (btw, there are Debian versions as well) which might or might not work for you is at best redundant and at worst hindering. Relying on an OS to do the security for you is beyond stupid for anyone other than the average Joe off the proverbial street and he uses Windows/MacOS/iOS/Android anyway.
My advice? Choose what you know best especially for mission critical situations. You don't want to browse documentations when things broke. There are ways to do EVERYTHING in all serious distros. At least for me that is paramount, because I am still typing ls in Windows and cd.. in Linux to this day, I write wrappers for both on computers I use the most. I can't switch so fast anymore at 48. The brain gets stuck and needs a few minutes to switch between the two, and in between Debian and RHEL it take much more than that, typing paths is especially challenging as I make typos anyway and when I am told something is not found my first reaction is to check for typos, only then I understand I am in another distro and sometimes I simply can't remember the correct paths in there.
First of all, chill out.
That's not what I said at all and you shouldn't assume I said anything more than what my words say. In case you mean newbs and not noobs, to a large extent, yes, I would argue RHEL-based distros are better, but really I think RHEL-based is great for the intermediate admin who understands theoretically how to run a server well but who isn't yet experienced enough (and may never will be) to do it very well. OR for the advanced admin who understands his own human limitations related to time and focus (true experts, imo). Ultimately, it's a good system for security if you don't disable the security features.
Organizations choose supported systems because it lowers the risks associated with fully relying on their own staffs to support their most critical IT systems. The fact that an organization might require RHEL, or supported Ubuntu for that matter, is a risk mitigation exercise. And it follows what I suggested in the post you took so much issue with related to not being solely responsible for setting up your system's security.
I don't know who was talking about printers but okay, link me the printer with support for only-RHEL.
Well it's good we have your expertise to tell us all about it. I'm not sure what part of all this has anything to do with what I said, but alrighty.
It's hindering if you're incompetent. But, okay so what do you do after you disable SELinux? Are you going to tell me about AppArmor? Or are you just too hindered to care about MAC?
There are many circumstances where OS security is critical and it should be a consideration with any system connected to the Internet. I don't know of a single example of where it would be, "stupid," other than maybe an always-offline totally air-gapped system that will never be networked. Is that what you're talking about? And this "average joe" thing, I have no idea what you're talking about.
It's good to use what you know (obviously), but now I'm confused about all the passion above for the alleged RHEL-only world.
Switch to Linux completely. I'm guessing you're not gaming anymore, right? Or still stuck on WoW maybe?
I'm 39. Switched in my late teens. It's been good. Never a boring Saturday afternoon (or a particularly fun one either lol).
RHEL and Debian are surprisingly similar, and really all Linux systems are once you get good enough to understand their internals and design decisions. (Mix in the BSDs for some real variety.) It's actually a very beneficial exercise to see the differences in how RHEL and Debian implement the packages you really care about.
I actually think that Debian is a "smarter" distro just in terms of the care they take to handle edge cases and idealistic system design. But you have to work to put it together, whereas with RHEL it's a lot more batteries included. And that was my whole point. That and nothing more.
As I said, I mean industrial printers, the kinds that make books, newspapers (the few that still exist on paper) as well as posters, big size and small size, not the A4/A3 B/W office printer which could be run with a plastic router with an USB port.
That is not what I meant. I mean the trivial task of typing commands when you are tired gets complicated when you are in a ton of terminals and you have to switch from one long path to another. It is better that the infrastructure is all based on the same type of distro.
I don't say the distros are so dissimilar that they require training (albeit it could be demanded by some CEOs and the like) I just said that, even after you get used with the differences, it is an extra hurdle you really don't want to concentrate on when your brain tries to find solutions to a meltdown in progress in a complex environment, such a big HA cluster when the storage has issues. When you are remote and keep getting errors, you have to guess what is going on and try to steer the ship, in those moments you should not be thinking of paths, figuring out which terminal belongs to each critical system is hard enough while you should try to guess where the problem started and how far it has or could spread.
An exercise for whom? Someone who is beyond running own desktop and some VPS, yes, someone who has to deal with hundreds of systems, the mix&match could be a serious headache. Absolutely, they are vastly more similar than Windows or BSD, but having knowledge about (as someone said) diesel and petrol engines, even being an experienced mechanic in both does not mean you would like the logistics nightmare of having all the spare parts, all the trained staff, all the supply chains and contracts for both, you would rather specialize in one and that is more a business decision, wherever you see the higher margin, rather than going with both, unless you are big enough to afford two branches, two workplaces with specialized staff and their own supply chain and customers.
As I said, this is a business decision, the admins are usually told what to do, personal preference plays little part in it, I don't say it is bad, just that, ultimately, it is out of our hands, you work with what you have been provided with, but it is best to have one environment or another at a time, so, for example, you could be in a RHEL mind at work, and back to Debian at home.
For specialists, the distro divide is merely an inconvenience, but saying that one distro is more secure because it has some default firewall on or some ACL when the user who installed it has root access and copy pastes some commands he saw on the internet because it shields him from some errors is simply not true. In fact, when he gets errors about something not working, the default reaction would be to disable any security system, chmod everything 777 and try again. If it works, fine, leave it like that, if it doesn't just paste some more commands from over the internet... Don't laugh, I saw people doing just that!
They're equivalent slang.
No.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=noob+vs+newb&ia=web
Then I will choose rocky. Why because Alma team themselves are confused on the future of alma. From their recent blog post, its not yet clear on which direction Alma may go in future, they are saying if by any means Alma has to close the shop, they are open sourcing Cloudlinux, Totally Confusing. Where as Rocky is clear on their future.
Yeah I def appreciate your sentiment. I was pretty surprised how fast Alma capitulated from the bug-for-bug standard. And I just don't know -- Alma is going to accept patches but by what standard are their patched packages supposed to be considered stable if Alma is introducing new code? The whole concept of stable starts to have cracks really fast.
Sometimes instead of trying to please everyone, you have to stand up for what's right. Rocky did; Alma didn't.
Personally I'm not giving up on Alma yet but they deserve some criticism.
Actually, yes. If we're going to cite references (which is ridiculous when discussing slang), how about Wikipedia?
"Newbie, newb, noob, noobie, n00b or nub is a slang term for a novice or newcomer, or somebody inexperienced in a profession or activity."
They do note that some people make distinctions, but this is hardly universal. I've heard them used interchangeably for at least 20 years. Maybe 30 years. Maybe 40.
The only time I've seen a clear distinction is when someone is discussing Raspberry Pi OS.
They are also distinct in the gaming communities.
I'm not sure why it would be ridiculous. But anyway, the same article links to this Wikipedia article which states:
So there's that. But to be fair they are talking about the context of a certain community which I think is fair to emphasize.
We all have our communities and experience within those communities. In my circles the distinction is clear. But certainly I don't doubt many people use them interchangeably and I don't doubt your experiences.
I believe it. I think it comes up among some of us Arch Linux (btw) users as well.
Yes, very much so.
Exploring open-source OS options for Kubernetes clusters with Cluster Ninja. While testing with Hetzner using openSUSE, curious about its popularity across providers. Is it a safe choice, or should I lean towards the reliability of Debian? MicroOS is ideal, but availability is a challenge. Any other popular container-focused alternatives for seamless provider support?
As noted, if there is demand, there is support. Even if no demand, many providers would upload an ISO on request.
I have had some cloud-init issues with RockyLinux on my Proxmox installation. I might have to re-work it due to an error on my part. In general, we prefer to use ISOs for customers to install RL.