19 Year LTS support

dos2unix

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2019
Messages
2,521
Reaction score
2,234
Credits
19,734


thats just complete nonsense xD Just upgrade the bloody box xD
 
thats just complete nonsense xD Just upgrade the bloody box xD

I agree, but I know a lot of people still running Redhat/CentOS 7. I see threads about those OS's here on Linux.org
even now in 2024.
 
Last edited:
yeah me too. I often get calls like "we run ubuntu 18.04" and alike, "can you help us upgrade" x)

People running suse certainly fall into the category of running that forever. I still think its nonsense x) Organize your IT and upgrade xD

Large corporations are particularly good at this game of endless not upgrading xD
 
Hi,

I think long support times are a good thing. The most people have no time reinstall the system every 2 years in best case. Or work on problems came with rohling release. In the most cases a system should work.

On server side the most setups are fire and forget.
On desktops side the most setups are present of the life time of the device.
(in my experience!!)
 
If have a saying in linux administration: if you don't have time to do it right now, when will you have the time?

I realize that theory is different from what actually happens in the real world, but at least every 2-3 years you just have to upgrade imho. I know its annoying, but there is no better alternative.
 
With RHEL every 10 years is more than enough, seems like it would be more of a pain to migrate everything after 20 years because a lot will have changed in 20 years. I would assume that SUSE will make you pay a license for for receiving updates for that long, Extended Life Support(ELS) even with RHEL costs an extra license fee.
 
Last edited:
Kinda sounds like marriage 19 years of the sos. :p

Seriously though I guess for some users that would be okay.
 
If have a saying in linux administration: if you don't have time to do it right now, when will you have the time?

I realize that theory is different from what actually happens in the real world, but at least every 2-3 years you just have to upgrade imho. I know its annoying, but there is no better alternative.
Upgrade yes but need to be forced to setup a completly new system.
 
With RHEL every 10 years is more than enough, seems like it would be more of a pain to migrate everything after 20 years because a lot will have changed in 20 years. I would assume that SUSE will make you pay a license for for receiving updates for that long, Extended Life Support(ELS) even with RHEL cost a license fee.
I think 10 years are enought too. But the most distros have short support times(2-3 Years) or rohling release and this is not enough.
 
Upgrade yes but need to be forced to setup a completly new system.

Exactly, and this tends to be the case.

We have both extremes. We have some old Redhat 7 systems that will fall out of support this month, because management
refuses to pay higher support costs. Redhat says they currently still support it, but this is a little misleading, it's already
in "extended support", so it's already a higher cost. The majority of these are HP Proliant G5 systems.

No one wants to upgrade these systems, because they would have to update the software. Most of the software they
are talking about here, isn't open source stuff from Redhat, but in house stuff made by our developers.
Now the crazy thing, is we used in house developers to avoid this very thing. So we could control our software.

At the other end of the scale, we have a lot of servers running a rolling release distro. It's close to the leading end
of things. It's currently running a 6.9.4 kernel, and that can get updated as often as every week. We do have a
development environment that mirrors production, we test it for 2 weeks before we update production to be the same.
These are running on Proliant G11 systems. We do have some Dell systems also.

It's the same problem in reverse. We can't run older LTS distro's because our "in house developed" software requires newer libraries, newer kernels, and newer drivers. But to be honest, in eight years of doing this, we've never had a problem.
Supporting the older stuff is much more of a pain than supporting the newer stuff. ( This is a different project, different team, different software than the ones in the first paragraph above )

The majority of our stuff is running mainstream LTS ( Redhat 9/clones) and this works well as long as you keep them up to date.

I know some management has the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy and that's OK up to a point, but I suspect
the vast majority of our Redhat 7 systems will still be running when we pass the "10 years old" mark this month.
A number of those servers have already broken down. We do have back-ups, but now we have to migrate them to newer hardware. Easier said than done in some cases, the newer hardware wants newer kernels wants newer drivers.

So it's great that SuSE will support these for a very long time, but I wonder if the reason they are doing this, is because
they know a lot of old hardware will fail in the next 20 years, and people will be forced to update anyway.

Another thing that drives a lot of this is "compressed hardware". The newer servers can have 8 CPUs each with 32 cores.
They can have 4TB of RAM. They can hold as many as 12 NVME disk drives. The disk drives themselves can be much larger,
we are currently using some 8TB drives. That's a lot of power crammed into one server. It would take about 6 Proliant G5's
to hold what one single server holds now. Not to mention they are faster CPUs, faster NetworkInterfaces, and much faster HardDrives. and the whole thing uses a less electricity than one old G5 server. Electricity and A/C costs add up when you're running a few thousand of these things.

...ahhh progress, you gotta hate it.... ummm I mean love it.

Edit: I forgot to mention we do have a few SuSE SLES systems. About a dozen or so.
 
Last edited:

Members online


Top