home | list info | list archive | date index | thread index

Re: CentOS alternatives: Devuan

> I'm not sure what you think you're getting with the listed distros that
> you wouldn't get with either Debian or Devuan

What do you think is the definition of "Enterprise Grade" - hint high
uptime is exactly the opposite unless you are running  a live-patch OS

> opensource if you're using Redhat (IBM) or derivatives, or Oracle, two
> of the worst serial offenders of vendor lock-in.

That sounds like religious talk - and really should have no place in
sound decision making.  I already started this thread by stating how
much I dislike Oracle, but I'll still consider them if they are the
right choice.  You are right IBM killed CentOS and that is driving a
lot of people away.  But why?  What did they do?   They removed the
"Enterprise Grade" from it.  But what is that?

Well for me there are a couple of major factors in that term:
- it should undergo EXTENSIVE QA - so immediately any of the
compile-your-own options are gone
- it should code-freeze on what was QA'ed and only allow changes into
the code in a controlled (and QA'ed) fashion (there goes Fedora, not
familiar enough with Debian but guessing they are gone too).   This is
what RHEL and Ubuntu (LTS) do.  It may be great that upstream is
adding code every week but if you don't need any of that you are
taking a huge risk by allowing it into production.
- it should provide important security and stability patches at a priority

You are right to look at what is running be default - but that is only
by default and most of it can and should be turned off.  Anything you
don't need or use should be off and ideally not even installed.  Every
extra package, every extra daemon is a risk.
Every change is a risk, so frequent code changes like with Fedora are
very risky.

Zero downtime datacenter does not mean high uptime on individual VMs.
 Patching needs to be done at very least monthly but not will-nilly.
As mentioned, new features for the sake of new features (that you
don't need) are risky.  There is even a strong argument not to have
high uptime from the point of view of ensuring everything comes up
correctly when a reboot does occur.   Did someone make a tweak they
forgot to make permanent?

Yes vendor lock-in can be an issue.  But realistically most Linux
distros are interchangable with each other.  And most Red Hat based
distros are interchangable almost seamlessly with little to no work in
the supporting orchestration code.

High uptime means no patching (unless running a live patch OS like Oracle)
No patching is extremely risky.

Anyway just my thoughts.   Still going to take a very close look at Oracle.

To unsubscribe send a blank message to linux+unsubscribe [ at ] linux-ottawa [ dot ] org
To get help send a blank message to linux+help [ at ] linux-ottawa [ dot ] org
To visit the archives: https://lists.linux-ottawa.org

message navigation