Il 2021-04-30 16:26 Johnny Hughes ha scritto:
On 4/30/21 4:32 AM, Gionatan Danti wrote:
Il 2021-04-30 06:55 Gordon Messmer ha scritto:
Why do you think that? Are RHEL (and CentOS) point releases backward
compatible or not? If you trust point releases to work, why would
you
hesitate to trust a distribution that resembles an upcoming point
release?
Because it very often break kABI compatibility, with 3rd party module
heavily affected.
Don't get me wrong: I understand that Stream is the way forward and
that
things are not going to change, and this is fine. But trying to ignore
the key differences (shorter support, unknown upgrade from Stream-8 to
Stream-9, broken kABI, etc) is not useful to anyone.
Stream is a *different* product, because is avoid (for the good or the
bad) basically *all* things that make RHEL so special. And lets face
it:
kABI and long/quality support from RedHat are the only two things
which
make RHEL special. Stripping them from CentOS will produce a very
different product. And, as a side note, things break more often on
Stream-8 then CentOS8. Maybe Stream only needs to mature, but it still
a
different product.
My personal opinion is that RH created Stream to give cloud vendors a
place to experiment/repackage *before* adding that to the main RHEL
distro. Stream really does not seem targeted aSo, t small sites /
"normal"
sysadmins, rather at large cloud vendors.
Which, again, is perfectly fine unless trying to disguise it as an
"almost-RHEL" distro.
Regards.
Sure .. so block kernels and build your own in that situation. Or use
something else. There are always edge cases. There are millions of
CentOS users. What percentage use 3rd party modules (other than nvidia
drivers). There are some, and this would be a problem for those
people.
So, IF another downstream distro works for you .. use it. Or use
Debian
or Ubuntu, or BSD. Use Alma or Rocky Linux. Buy RHEL.
As stated above, if this is the vision of Stream, fine. I am not arguing
about the vision: while I don't like it, my opinion is irrelevant.
But disguising Stream as "almost-RH" (a mantra repeated many times both
here and in various blog) is plain wrong, and I genuinely don't think it
will be good for Stream.
And you know better than me that what you wrote above regarding the
kernel is a double-edge sword: as you cope with security patches if the
kernel is blocked? How do you cope with HP/DELL/Lenovo kmod needed to
configure the RAID subsystem if using a rolling kernel? Did you notice
that even RH-sponsored modules as kvdo were broken multiple times on
Stream? If you are using VDO to access your storage and it suddenly is
not usable anymore, how would you feel? What about ZFS on Linux users?
Do you realize this drastically reduces Stream fitness to bare-metal
install (one of the main CentOS usage was as hypervisor)?
The correct answer is to buy RH: fine. But do not let Stream touch
anything which require a kABI compatible modules. As said above, the
Stream move is squarely addresses *cloud* vendor requests and needs.
Again, fine. But please leave apart the RH comparison, this is not going
to help Stream.
Again, don't let me wrong: I wishes the best to Stream, and I will use
it where appropriate. But "where" is much smaller today than yesterday.
But this aside, I really thank you all CentOS maintainer for your
monumental work, and I really hope Stream will be a success.
Regards.
--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti@xxxxxxxxxx - info@xxxxxxxxxx
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
