Re: (SOLVED) YUM (DNF) Possible Confusion Centos 8

[Warren Young <warren@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 30, 2020, at 9:37 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 1/24/20 8:02 AM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote:
>> 
>> I've never really understood how hiding those solutions behind a wall is a
>> good thing in/for the OpenSource world. Looks like I'm not alone :-)
> 
> A good thing is the ability for someone to be able to pay people actual
> money so that CentOS can actually exist.  There is no CentOS (or
> Scientfic Linux or Oracle Linux) without RHEL.  There is no RHEL if Red
> Hat can not make money.
> 
> If one is not smart enough to support their own install .. the answer is
> .. buy RHEL.

While I think I agree with you in principle, this case doesn’t really fall into the category you’re outlining, for several reasons.

1. dnf is complaining that "nothing provides module(perl:5.26)” when Perl is evidently installed.  How did it get there if nothing provides it?  I don’t see how this is anything but a packaging bug.  If the financial stability of the Red Hat subsidiary of IBM, Inc. depends on people paying them for advice on how to get around broad-based bugs Red Hat created — or at least allowed to pass QA — that’s a perverse incentive that will ultimately damage the subsidiary.

2. I would think that the “support” you speak of, the lifeblood of the Red Hat subsidiary, is principally one-to-one, where the recipient is getting value they could not easily receive any other way.  That should exclude problems so common that they end up in the knowledge base.  That’s one-to-many, which means the per-recipient value of the information is amortized.

The bottom line is that I think the community here is acting as an auxiliary QA arm for Red Hat, benefiting their paying customers.  Our payment?  I’ll take some more CentOS, thanks. :)
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos