btw..

i use debian btw 😂😂

Finally, debian getting that recognition it deserves

I use slackware btw ;)

More like Debian and Nix. Optionally Guix. Pacman does have some issues which would need to be fixed, like 'forced' updates if you want to Install new updates, which probably won't get resolved anywhere soon. It may change in the future, but for now I would say it's 4th best of Community driven distros for typical users, and I doubt it will get better.

Also, folks using words like "idiot", "stupid", or the like in response to human beings will get the boot. That's not discourse I care to have. Go ahead and unsubscribe if you don't like it, I don't want your views.

Corporations can ONLY value $$$.

Oh trust me the EL systems do a lot! I can appreciate the amount of work and effort that goes into them. Rocky has contributed numerous tools which are beneficial to the whole ecosystem. One prominent tool being Peridot. Rocky also has great documentation for new users. I'm actually working with the Rocky team on verifying if Stream is capable of creating a good clone or not. Skip Grube and Jon Wright (from Alma) are doing research on the current package drift between the RHEL package set and CentOS Stream git history. When it comes to Debian I personally don't like the APT package manager. I've had instability issues in the past with it, but other than that I love Debian! Debian has a solid base and if it weren't for apt I think it could be a "sit it and forget it" type of setup.

Also yes it's Andross.

While I don't really know what to think of Red Hat's stance yet and I personally use AlmaLinux as well, I don't agree that clones are not a "wholesale ripoff" (although I wouldn't use that loaded term either). The reason why the clones are popular is exactly what we've been saying for all of these years. It's free RHEL. That's why we like 'em. The problem with going wholesale into the Debian ecosystem, is frankly that its desktop component is not very good. With the Red Hat ecosystem on the other hand, we have Fedora Linux, which smokes Debian by a mile on the desktop. If you choose to go with the Debian server component, that's fine, but you'll be using a "corporate" Linux on the desktop (Ubuntu or System76) if you want to keep the same analog or be forced to use something that is just plain lackluster (plain Debian). I do feel like Fedora Linux is a bit of an in-between for "corporate" Linux and community Linux. So basically, you either have to be switching back and forth between Linux distro paradigms, you are using a "corporate" distro, or you are not having a good time. Sorry if I offended desktop Debian fans. This is just my opinion.

You "forgot" to mention you laughed at him and considered him a ridiculous freak

@@alastorgdl lmao yeap

“How long it took” yeah you read my mind.

Red Hat was bought out by IBM...I don't think Red Hat would have done this on their own.

Yep. They all follow the same MBA [moronic brainless accountants] formula.

Oh wow, I didn't hear anything about it, deep diving into it rn. Thank you for bringing it up, it is really is eerily similar.

@@boczkowska9613 ...and now Unity, prompting Pillar of Garbage to post video ID xDPPig9JR5Y about techno-feudalism. (See also Cory Doctorow's enshittification cycle.)

CentOS was a community distro. That's what the C stands for. The issue there was it was open to being purchased and the bylaws or whatever allowed for it to be changed. Rocky and AlmaLinux now take up the Enterprise community distro. The question is whether they set the legal entity up to keep it community. AlmaLinux is a spin of CloudLinux and Rocky is from the same dude who created CentOS.

Community-driven is safer. But hey, what's wrong with the medieval liturgic way of maintaning software for distros like Debian? It really copies the worst things of bureaucracy.

Same here, and it seems the rules/curation of the comments keep things in the sane world. Good content in and out of the video

I think you're right. Oracle, Microsoft and now Rehat all actively working against open source and the wider benefit. "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" is exactly what happened to Centos Linux which was originally a community distro, until Redhat took legal ownership and board control.

The issue is the ability to be binary 1:1 or bug-for-bug compatible with RHEL. AlmaLinux has indicated it will no longer be binary compatible but will be be ABI compatible, which is probably good enough. RockyLinux has said it will still be able to be binary compatible. We'll see. But as an admin with over 400 Linux instances and the need for long term package support, an enterprise distro with clear roadmaps is required. So glad these two are taking it up.

Redhat seems to be going all-in on trying to control desktop Linux. Trying to lock out distros like Alma, ditching Xorg, KDE, and Motif. The end goal seems to be try to make desktop Linux strictly Redhat/Wayland/Gnome. There's other stuff they've deprecated seemingly because it competes with their commercial offerings. So yea, it's all about the Benjamins.

I was at my cousin's, early 2000s, and she had just gotten a computer, but it was useless, as it didn't have an os installed. Went to the magazine shop downstairs, choose one of the live CDs, and boom, she had a working PC!

On one hand, I agree with RedHat They are the ones, because they are larger than other Linux providers, to resolve bugs faster than other providers. That staff costs!! On the other hand, the Alma and Rocky and Eurolinux/SUSE/Ubuntu/Oracle distros just take from RH, without giving back. I have seen only two distros resolving security bugs with original fixes. For most of the Linux users on KZfaq, and that includes me, I am a hobbyist. I benefit from my 20 years of free Linux and Linux support. So, how does RH cut costs and stop the pseudo "Piracy"? Do we need to have a very low cost subscription fee to access the bug fixes? Should we be paying some small amount ($5US) for each full distro we download, which will include a year's bugfixes? If so,.then RH can recover from the RH clones who take, but don't compensate RH for the work done

@@georgH I remember those days well. That and trying to figure out the dot pitch to x serve working properly.

Debian is only useful for enterprise environments.

@@GoatzombieBubba Except that I've been using it in my personal laptop since 2001. and in all my other PCs since 99

The Fedora council is, with major positions as RedHat positions. I.E. You apply to get a job at RedHat to sit in those positions.

Fedora is not "just sponsored" by Red Hat, RH completely owns and controls the project. They own all the trademarks, all the infrastructure, and the project is dictated by Red Hat's interests. The biggest decision-makers in Fedora are Red Hat employees.

@@Waitwhat469 Thanks for that context. Wasn't aware of that

@@babyboomertwerkteam5662 Thank you. I was under the impression it was community run but simply funded by Redhat.

@@babyboomertwerkteam5662 No they dont.

When does rdebian *not* work, please?

​@@2501bproject I'm too cowardly to say that something *always* works.

@@2501bproject Actually I tried to spawn a VM using cockpit on it (debian 12) and it failed :( The same exact setup just works perfectly fine on RHEL, Fedora and even o Ubuntu. Don't get me wrong, I do like Debian (and used it since 3.0 days), but for me RHEL is working better on my home server.

Been using it since 2001/2002 in my own PCs, laptops and servers. Compared to Windows at the time, I only had to install it on new computers. It's great!

@@georgH I had it on my NSLU2 , but they dropped support for it at or around Stretch. It ran a couple of cameras and another couple of drives through a four way USB hub, all on 32MB of physical memory. It never complained.

Yeah I'm in the same boat, no other distro offers an experience that is easy to use + up to date packages without breaking than Fedora does. openSUSE would be a close second and I would use it more if Yast wasn't a thing (I find it too complicated to use and not a fan of having to install stuff from it instead of the Software store)

​@@Robotta Hey, Tumbleweeed user here, what have you installed from YaST? In all this time, I've evaded YaST for software installation with 100% success, so it's not obligatory to use. In fact, I've been using Discover more to find new alternatives. I can understand you finding YaST kind of complicated, but once you give it a look, you can find anything you need in a fast way. I only use it to manage repositories some times and to edit GRUB because it's easier that way.

cool but I hope it wont change?

debian is the best distro simple as ignore archies

I don't want to sound cynical, but Suse is just trying to capture customers lost to Red Hat and fill in the empty gaps, with the sole purpose of making more money. Obviously their contributions help a lot, but don't let them sweeten you with nice words, after all they are a corporation with more or less the same monetary design as Red Hat. The only difference is that nobody has bought Suse until now... Like Veronica, I switched 100% to community distributions, I feel that by collaborating and donating to them my money really goes to the developers and is not lost in the deep pockets of some corporate suite. EDIT: I correct myself, Suse has already been sold several times, not being as prominent as Red Hat has not attracted any big fish, but it confirms that in the corporate world everything can change very, very quickly...

and, they have an appaloosa.

I use it for a gaming desktop. For me it's better than any arch derivative I've seen for that purpose.

@@Nefsen I get the cynicism. I'm just now reading your comment. But yes, SUSE had been sold several times. And yes, I know it s an attempt to grab customers from Red Hat. As I said, I'm sure there's a profit motive in SUSE's actions. Still, SUSE is even older than Red Hat and I feel they have an even closer connection. SUSE is German. I'm not sure if that changes any of the corporate culture by any means, as I don't know German culture all that well. But I assume there would be some differences when dealing with an American corporation like Red Hat. But I have red that Germany has a culture where workers and bosses work together a bit more than most places in the US. So I wonder if this might help SUSE have a different attitude towards open source than American corporations. But I really don't know, TBH. Still, I liked OpenSUSE before all this. I'm a fan of YAST in particular, and I like Tumbleweed because while it's a rolling release, they do a bit more testing before releasing packages, and they don't break things like Manjaro. :)

I believe openSUSE is community-driven

The rock solid foundation of Debian is amazing, and I simply spin up docker containers on server with self contained dependencies if I need something up to date. For personal desktop, depending on the hardware, I'd choose either PopOS with Nvidia driver or simply Ubuntu/Debian with gnome depending on which one downloads faster

Same, been using it since 2001/2002. It freed me from RedHat's rpm hell. Never had to reinstall it, ever.

Fedora all the way here. If it's good enough for Linus Torvalds, it's good enough for me..!

@@TestGearJunkie. According to Torvald he has never tried Debian or he found it hard to install (this was back in the days).

@@AceOfBased Same here, I just didn't get on with it. It might be my imagination, but the security on the version I tried sucked.

@@TestGearJunkie. I get it, but Debian 12 should not be hard.. just saying. :)

@@AceOfBased The command line structure is different, been using Fedora since v10 and I'm too stuck in my ways 😁

i installed linux mint once and then updated it and it immediately deleted it's own desktop environment lol

Yup! And I do use BSDs for servers a bit, actually. Particularly with x86 COBOL where there's some idiosyncrasies around Linux sometimes. Sometimes something old doesn't play nice with systemd and I find that a BSD is just the right thing.

@@VeronicaExplains Which BSD distribution do you prefer in such cases? FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD

So let's oppose to that, all of us - use community driven software as much as possible.

And that's why stop writing with idea

Go was created at Google, so I'm not surprised that KZfaq would make the switch from Python to Go. In fact, Go is a much better choice (imho).

@@cseale61 yeah idk how go, a language that has been open sourced for 10 years is comparable to a completely closed language

I hear what you're saying, but transitioning from Python to Go is more of a technical decision than a corporate orthodoxy, despite it being Google's own programming language. That's because Go is still considered a toy language just like Python, and yet runs considerably faster than Python. So it's an easy win just on technical merits. I'm not sure what you mean by Eclipse vs IntelliJ, sure one is a commercial tool while the other is not, and in my opinion both are fine text editors. But IntelliJ is a much better developer experience. One could certainly use Vim instead, and many people do.

Sway is so awesome!!!

Do you know systemd is a RH child (trojan)?

I’ll bite. What’s wrong with systemd actually as it is now ie in Debian 12? Or even rhel/fedora?

@@spykezspykez7001 Unix has several very fundamental ideas And one of them is "one component does ONE thing and does it well" systemd is the mocking of that principle It's like you think of USA without the hypocrisy: that's NOT REALLY USA

Bookworm is fairly up to date and a new release will be out next year. I use debian stable for my desktops

@@alastorgdl You do know it's 2024 right? Good God. Init and scripts are not event based and from a different era in time when a Machine was physical and stationary and had maybe 40 packages at the most. Not tens of thousands. Only SystemD or Solaris's XML based event driven init systems can handle containers, images moving from on prem to cloud, cyber security attacks, and even basic configuration changes such as a laptop going to sleep on a corporate network and waking up in a hotel. You can't do these things with init without evil hacks and whole programs (which should be config files only) in RC files. Change is hard and it is best as an IT professional to get with the program and remain current and relevant. Things like Teraform and SystemD with declaritive and event driven services and processes are how to handle a modern 21st century environment.

What are the differences between regular Slackware and Salix? What I observed is a increasingly lower stability. 15 years ago, Slackware was rock solid and ultra responsive. Versions 14.x were extremely shaky for me. 15.0 is better but Firefox can crash X and sometimes entire system, which was unthinkable in 10-12 times. Have you observed the same?

@@alastorgdl I used Slackware a long time ago, and it was my primary Linux system due to its simplicity and stability, but then I ended up using various Red Hat based/derived Linux systems for some time, and over the last few years I used only Windows. Now I'm in the process of ditching Windows and moving back to Linux... so I've been testing a few options and doing research about the current state of Linux distros, with various pros and cons that accompany them. From that research I discovered Salix OS, and has been impressed with what I've read about it. It is apparently 100% backward compatible with Slackware, and the additional repositories that Salix provides can also be used with vanilla Slackware. Salix does however have some additional tools to make things easier for people who do not have the time or patience to do everything "by hand". E.g. Salix includes some GUI tools such as the Gslapt frontend for package management from various sources, including multiple repositories and Slackbuilds. It also claims to have "sysvinit-scripts Tweaked for boot speedup", "optimized for desktop usage", "high quality package repositories with dependency support", "incredibly fast package tools", ... You've got me worried now, when you say that Slackware is no longer as stable as it used to be... that is precisely why I was looking at going back to it... So should I rather use Debian? I would really prefer to not have the bloat and big-tech "sponsored" systemd and similar "we know what is best for you" systems :) Unfortunately that rules out vanilla Debian, as it is only available with systemd. That (and because of the added immutability feature) has gotten me quite interested in Nitrux (Debian-based, but uses OpenRC init). I've used two non-systemd Linux systems (Artix and Void) and I definitely prefer them over Fedora, for example. Artix does however have much fewer software packages available than Arch and many other distros, unless you add the Arch repos to it and risk dependency / compatibility problems. Void is nice and their documentation is excellent, but I would prefer to use a system with more established roots, such as a Debian / Slackware based one, as binaries are more often available for such systems than for the "new kids on the block".

I am here for you. Rhel and fedora was my home.

I think a lot of what Red Hat has done can also be contributed to companies (probably government agencies too, just a hunch) that don't like Open Source, but still want to use Linux Servers. I've worked for companies that, for whatever reason, are insistent on "Closed Source Software" which boggles my mind. I had to tell one company "just because it's Closed Source doesn't make it more secure!" not that that company ever listened to their Devs. Well, they got RHEL as a Closed Source Option now.

Yeah I don't have a problem with a company making a profit and there are some non-profit companies that can be more of a scam and hide behind the non-profit flag or a way to get tax free status. But I just like the company to be well-behaved and not underhanded. The publicly traded ones have to be watched like a hawk.

And fund a majority of it.

@@benblasco Embrace extend extinguish baby 😎

@@LillyAnarkitty pure FUD.

@@benblasco Okay Bill Gates.

@@benblascothe fact you unironically said “FUD” SAYS A LOT ABOUT YOU

RHEL as an OS is stable and predictable. Redhat as a company... isn't.

I think that's unlikely. I can't see "Red Hat leaving the Linux space" in any way. That's basically folding, and considering their impact on IBM's software division I'm not seeing it anytime soon. Particularly when they have a cheaper alternative in the "status quo ante greed".

I was thinking that too. RedHat is also walking into a legal grey area here by trying to manipulate and alter and reinterpret existing open source licenses on code in their own damn codebase to make it now no longer freely accessible and subject to terms of their developer account agreement. I hope a legal challenge does come out of this and they lose. I'm no lawyer, but they definitely seem to be violating the spirit if not also enforceable legal aspects of open source licenses.

It's perfectly fine to charge for GPL software as long as you also provide the source. But once you sell GPL software the recipient can share it freely if they so choose. Here RH is encouraging customers not to share the code by saying if you do share they won't give you any newer versions.

Sue IBM... 15 years later will the verdict even been relevant (it wasn't in the case with SCO)? The whole notion of 'Enterprise' Linux is absurd. Hire software engineers, not lawyers; you get more for your money.

The reason we don't have CentOS is because Red Hat bought it and shut it down. Not because of anything else. You can imagine all of the justifications you want, but at the end of the day, we lost CentOS because Red Hat acquired it and decided to shut it down. To put my critique of this argument another way: Ubuntu repackages Debian. But we don't see this kind of active hostility from Debian because they know they're building something for the community, and have structured themselves accordingly. Debian's onto something that Red Hat missed- that's the point.

@@VeronicaExplains The comment was more about Oracle, not CentOS. Ubuntu is not a direct copy and paste of Debian, they add and change a lot and do their own thing. RHEL clones are just copy/paste.

Other EL systems are not just copy/paste. There's a lot of work that goes into it, work that Red Hat encouraged until money got in the way. They don't do what Canonical does for Ubuntu/Debian systems, but it's a lot more than someone's hobby clone. The pro-corporate lobby in my comments seems to think that these "clones" are a wholesale ripoff. Tell that to the thousands of devs out there building RHEL software (something which helps Red Hat's "open source" bottom line) and using Rocky or Alma as a dev target. I also don't accept the argument that Oracle shouldn't try to make a buck off of open source software, same as Canonical. Go ahead, but expect the flack if you don't share your source code freely- particularly after advertising for a generation or two that you'd keep it free as a core principle of your corporate culture.

@@VeronicaExplains If there is a lot of work that goes into it, and they aren't just doing a copy and paste, then they have nothing to complain about since all the code in RHEL is in CentOS Stream and available publicly. If they don't need to copy/paste RHEL then they don't need the RHEL source.

A+ comment. David Marcus would be proud.

Here here!