I am planning to move to Ubuntu LTS rather than even touch EL8. If I need a package that Ubuntu doesn't have but Debian does, I can just grab it and install, and it will work. The only reason that I used EL for as long as I did was the SystemV/Upstart management of startup. Now taht everything is systemd, there is no advantage to not doing a Debian based system. Since I know that I will be retiring before the facility does, having a means to get pro support is desirable, but we don't need it for all of our machines, just the few that are used to figure out what runs everywhere. We have too many machines to go with something that has a seat limit. Also, you can bet the free seats of RHEL will be gone by the next rev. Going with Debian or a related distro is reasonable for science, as they do have a good SIG that actually packages real software. But going with Ubuntu is also reasonable.
________________________________ James Fait, Ph.D. Senior Beamline Scientist SER-CAT, APS, Argonne National Laboratory Building 436B-020, 9700 S. Cass Ave., Argonne, IL 60439 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cell: 815-302-2467 Fax: 630-252-0652 Light When You Need It ________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Yasha Karant <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:21 PM To: Mailing list for Scientific Linux users worldwide <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Pondering a switch to Debian There are several issues with IBM RHEL clones, ultimately controlled by what is termed the Nazgul below (presumably a reference to the fictional entities: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Nazg-25C3-25BBl&d=DwIDaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A&m=nTjqdNvLHGUa2BQ5UsMUyvKD_BqcIQgVCd1DVvdlzDg&s=6U4Ha5dld83V2VaQLvx2ZWBL-I2zQZdYozUJ6C87tl0&e= ). For better or worse, but so far "for better", I have switched to Ubuntu LTS current (20.04.2 as this is written), not Debian. Ubuntu, as with the old RHEL, has internal "professional" support and development; LTS is used in the "real" world as an "enterprise" distro. My reason -- and after much internal discussion and debate -- is that a 10 year lifecycle is only as meaningful as IBM will allow the reality of this statement. As new hardware, architecture, and software (including "systems" applications) emerge, without "updates" and "backports", only "obsolete" systems will be supported from the actual IBM RH sources (not executables, and not supported) that need to be built. Updates for current hardware, etc., will need to come from ElRepo, Epel, etc., unless (almost) all EL clone distros come together to do what IBM RH may not be doing under the IBM Nazgul. Is IBM trustworthy? As a for-profit corporation, absolutely -- to make whatever financial achievements it plans, subject only to regulations. Is it trustworthy to keep promises, such as CentOS? -- the track record of IBM (or many other such vendors) does not inspire confidence in "trustworthiness". If the CentOS situation significantly cost revenue or market share, then indeed IBM RH would be "trustworthy". Will the CentOS RHEL situation cost IBM market share? Probably not -- the CERN Fermilab HEP community represents not that much market share. On 2/3/21 5:03 PM, Vinícius Ferrão wrote: > I will not move to Debian. > > RHEL clones have 10 years of lifecycle, AlmaLinux just dropped it’s beta > today. So there’s no reason to move to Debian or Ubuntu. > >> On 3 Feb 2021, at 21:52, Keith Lofstrom <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Having been burned by IBM before, and with no guarantee >> that "Long-term Redhat for individuals" will survive IBM's >> legal department into the far future --- I'm thinking about >> abandoning 25 years of Redhat experience and switching to >> Debian, while my aging brain can still handle change. >> >> Debian - yikes! >> >> Thinking about - not decided, though I halted work on a >> server upgrade to CentOS 8 while I wait for the dust to >> settle. Rocky in April is another option, but if IBM >> goes after them, they will be a wet spot on the floor. >> >> So - who else is contemplating a move to Debian? >> >> I very much hope to stay connected to the "scientific" >> aspect of our community. Making big changes together >> with other science computationalists would be easier. >> >> Easier still would be staying with an RPM distro, IF it >> remained useful and legal and affordable for our kind of >> computing. An e-commerce and corporate infrastructure >> focused distro, not so much. >> >> Keith >> >> P.S. I remember the Red Hat booth at OSCON 2014, after the >> Borging of CentOS, where I was assured that they would >> support CentOS into the distant future. That "assurance" >> survived the IBM acquisition by 18 months. What changes >> will 5 more years of IBM (and their formidable lega >> department, called the Nazgul by other technology lawyers) >> result in? >> >> >> -- >> Keith Lofstrom [email protected] >
