back to article Free Red Hat clone CentOS-7 is full of Linux Container love

The CentOS Project has announced general availability of CentOS-7, the first release of the free Linux distro based on the source code for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7. It's also the first major CentOS release to ship since the CentOS Project entered into a new funding and co-development partnership with Red Hat in …

  1. keithpeter Silver badge
    Pint

    Nice as desktop

    Although CentOS is primarily a server - and now cloudy - OS it works very well on the desktop/laptop(*). The RHEL Beta/RC and lately the prerelease CentOS builds have worked almost without flaw on an old laptop.

    EL7 marks a new departure in other possibly less welcome ways...

    Redhat have previously chucked the source code on ftp.redhat.com as a series of srpms. Now the source is deployed via a git repository, in fact a whole collection of repositories, one for each of the 9000+ packages. If I have understood the situation correctly, updates to the source code will be pushed as commits to each of the git repositories. RedHat push the commits, CentOS (and anyone else) can get the modified code. The git account represents the only connection between RedHat and the rest of the EL food chain.

    The CentOS team have written scripts to allow package source to be harvested and the time line of changes to each of the git repos to be tracked so others can establish what is pushed over the wall by RedHat. This means that the other EL clones (Scientific Linux, Springdale Linux and, well, yes, Oracle Linux) will have to assemble the code in the same way or use the CentOS binaries to build on...

    ...Scientific Linux (CERN) have already started working with CentOS

    http://linux.web.cern.ch/linux/docs/Hepix-Spring-2014%20Next%20Linux%20version%20at%20CERN.pdf

    Free software is developed in public, and the CentOS team are genuinely proud of buildlogs, seven.centos.org and the various exchanges on centos-devel with much more information available.

    One of the slightly more entertaining moments for Reg readers may have been the 'professional discussion' around version numbering that took place on centos-devel. See

    http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-June/010444.html

    and the subsequent replies. I think there is enough of a narrative in that thread to keep a couple of sociology PhDs going for some time.

    (*) You will need EPEL and the NuX Desktop (http://li.nux.ro/repos.html) repos enabled to get the usual codecs/video players going. You might need the Centos-Plus kernel to get wifi drivers for some older wifi cards. The stock kernel has been slimmed.

    Pint: for all involved.

  2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

    CentOS7 is out!

    I'm so happy! Absolutely made my week.

  3. Levente Szileszky

    The Docker image is...

    ...the last beta image but it's already working fine which is awesome (shameless plug: see szlevi.com for a newb guide to quickly get it up and running.)

  4. Chris Daemon
    Flame

    RHEL's choices determine CentOS

    I get that SystemD and Gnome 3 are the future. I cannot fathom why I'd want either "upgrades" (save yourself the explanations, I did my research better than you can flame me.) I like Coke Classic, and I will find a way to stick with a distro which does not overcomplicate my nearly-headless server needs.

    I switched from RH to Fedora, and when I cut myself on the bleeding edge, I switched to CentOS... only to find out that simplicity is traded in for the "new and improved" glitzkrieg in version 7.

    Why would I want Gnome 3 if I cannot have the access to the system as in Gnome 2? This is going on my email/http servers, older hardware, with no cycles to waste.

    No, I will not learn how to "spin" a distro from CentOS, and I do not need advice in rigging things with Epel or other repos. I want to use my time to code awesome things in Perl (or switch to Python, since people are just bending over for Moose.)

    So, party, party... for a linux distro that has lost its value to me.

    And zip it. If you feel the unbearable itch to trollspond, let me know a good distro that uses tested, efficient, and proven technology and not some limited-feature/beta nonsense. I shall then quietly sit with the experienced admins and recite Torvald rants.

    P.S.: It's annoying enough to have to disable SELinux - I know the implications, but I know what I'm doing... since I am not distracted by splooging over some "pretty" desktop.

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

      IIRC, EL7 supports MATE. So you aren't forced to use Gnome 3.

      1. keithpeter Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

        "IIRC, EL7 supports MATE. So you aren't forced to use Gnome 3."

        MATE needs you to enable an additional repo.

        If people want just a 'stock' CentOS without extra repos they will need to choose KDE or Gnome at media download time. Gnome ships with the 'classic' extensions enabled so it looks familiar (two panels &c) but still uses a composited screen.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

          Are additional repos against your religion?

          1. keithpeter Silver badge
            Windows

            Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

            "Are additional repos against your religion?"

            No, certainly all for extra functionality with external repos. Some places may have rules though, and my understanding of EPEL is maybe MATE 1.8 gets upgraded to MATE 1.15 or something in a year or two with different configs &c = more work.

            1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

              Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

              "my understanding of EPEL is maybe MATE 1.8 gets upgraded to MATE 1.15 or something in a year or two with different configs &c = more work."

              With the exception of a sendmail LDAP issue that was part of the core OS, I haven't had those kinds of repo issues with core, EPEL or RPMFusion in over 6 years. I think that sort of crap is behind the big repos now.

              1. keithpeter Silver badge
                Windows

                Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

                http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-July/011410.html

                Read this thread on CentOS-Devel just in case the SIGs are of value to you in a production capacity.

    2. keithpeter Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

      "...let me know a good distro that uses tested, efficient, and proven technology and not some limited-feature/beta nonsense...."

      CentOS 6.x?

      You could even try Oracle Linux and come over to the dark side with Java :twisted:

      The troll: I'm going back under my bridge now

    3. nineworlds

      Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

      I imagine a graphics-less minimal install will be along fairly soon.

    4. future research

      Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

      Your options seam to be stick with Centos 6 or try out debian and use the stable branch. I use both without any problems.

      My servers do not have X installed. I use a tablet,phone (android) or ubuntu for web browsing, but I take the least resistance option of windows at work.

      I don't believe I have used systemd yet, and they only GUI under a desktop Linux is Ubuntu 10.04 ( don't even know which windows manager it is) because I haven't felt the need to upgrade mythtv yet.

      1. Chris Daemon

        Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

        That would be my conclusion... CentOS 6.5 perhaps (as I understand has a hybrid-startup-thingy-who-cares-it-works.) Debian seems to have the same, with the stable v7 introducing SystemD preliminary support (read: inevitably useless.)

        Sidenote: have no problem with a better init system. But it cannot be half-baked (and xml, really?) if this goes into production servers. The FireWallD (vs IPTables) is a similar nightmare... all good ideas, with the best intentions, paving towards a very unpleasant place!

        It's actually not that difficult to learn those new horrors. They are complex, idealistic nonsense, introduce a lot of pitfalls - things that you really want to avoid on streamlined servers. The pay-off isn't huge (yet)... and THAT's the problem. Ain't nobody got time for that.

        @keithpeter, I absolutely agree.

        @Trevor_Troll, you barely qualify to be read in Opie's Twitter-Voice.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: RHEL's choices determine CentOS

          "@Trevor_Troll, you barely qualify to be read in Opie's Twitter-Voice."

          Oh? How so? I pointed out that you could rather easily get Mate set up on CentOS 7, and it shouldn't break your distro to do so. That's trolling?

          I said nothing about systemd. While I happen to agree with most - but not quite all - of the gripes on boycott systemd, I just don't have enough experience with systemd to really comment about how miserable it is (or not) quite yet. So I didn't.

          I didn't recommend using extra repositories on servers - servers shouldn't have GUIs, this is Linux - but see no issue with their use on desktops. Linux desktop users are generally more technically competent than Windows users...or they're administered by competent people and locked way the hell down. So why wouldn't you allow the use of extra repositories that would make the desktop experience more usable?

          How is any of that trolling, hmm? Or is your hatred for change so overwhelmingly powerful that if someone says anything good about a distro that you've decided is bad you must lash out at them?

          Take your religion, and your spite and go decompile your own personality matrix, mmmkay?

  5. Jay 2
    Happy

    Having had a very quick play with RHEL 7 to see what it was all about, I'll be grabbing this next week as the bulk of our servers are CentOS 5.x/6.x. Mind you, not looking forward to all those potential upgrades at some point!

  6. Chika
    Flame

    Includes systemd? Oh shit. I was considering CentOS as a possible replacement for openSUSE who have really crapped their distro up with the piece of poorly thought out and poorly coded rubbish.

    Mind you, I shouldn't be surprised. systemd seems to be a fad with distros these days. Yes, a fad. "Let's go with the latest shiny stuff and sod compatibility issues!" To date I have yet to see anything appreciably better than what came before; sysvinit, upstart, whatever.

    I'd say more but what I'd likely say is NSFW.

  7. keithpeter Silver badge
    Pint

    Springdale Linux (dark horse)

    CentOS mission is really about servers and now cloud/openstack I imagine.

    Google groups chat implies that Springdale Linux (AKA PUIAS Linux) intend to remain independent of CentOS [1] and rebuild an EL clone from the source. A look at their servers [2] suggests a 32 bit build already (I'm seeing an i386 boot image tending to suggest it isn't just 32 bit packages to support 32 bit programs on a 64bit host). Maybe there is some older hardware lurking in Fuld Hall?

    Scientific Linux (Fermilab) have also decided to push out an alpha release of EL7 built independently [3].

    Interesting times. My theory is more reasonably independent teams rebuilding from source means less mistakes and more error checking.

    Just waiting for Oracle now [!]

    Pints all round.

    [1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/springdale-users/408i_ZBsKXg

    [2] http://springdale.princeton.edu/data/puias/7.0/ [mirrors in usual places]

    [3] http://scientificlinuxforum.org/index.php?showtopic=2837

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like