Oracle Linux

etcetera

Active Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2024
Messages
134
Reaction score
34
Credits
1,593
I had to get a free Redhat clone and with the CentOS going away, the choice was very limited.
Ran OL9 for a few years.
It is supposed to be 100% compatible with Redhat, rpm and yum and stuff.

The only issue I ran into was that it uses its own repos so that if you want to install docker, you point to different repos than redhat. And sometimes the version was a bit off.

Basically it's like Fedora/Redhat/CentOS but without the stupid licensing/registering/subscription BS that Redhat is married to.

I suggest you try it.
 


Basically it's like Fedora/Redhat/CentOS but without the stupid licensing/registering/subscription BS that Redhat is married to.

I suggest you try it.

There might be users who value Linux distros backed by a company for various reasons like professional support or higher quality software and integration etc., but I'm not one of those users because want to get away from any company backed software.

My only complaint against software backed by a company are privacy concerns and tendency of companies to change the rules, especially rules regarding what's free.

Companies are known to give something for "free" to increase user base but then later change the rules and starting to charge it.
 
OL capitalizes on the fact that Redhat pulled the plug on CentOS, which made a lot of people upset.

I am forced to use Redhat professionally, not my choice. I don't like it and its whole commercial vibe. It has become like a religion. There is the Redhat way. Satellite server, etc. they have deviated from the Linux free software vibe a long time ago and with their IBM purchase, things have gone downhill even more.

Oracle Linux is basically what CentOS used to be like. If you have to use a Redhat based system for your personal use, it wouldn't make sense for me to jump on Debian like distro. I want familiarity with RH and clones and OL is the best alternative there is.

They do have the same support scheme and pricing structure as Redhat if you want support and just as expensive as Redhat.

But now you can get full functionality without any fees or registration. I am tired of Redhat.
 
The only issue I ran into was that it uses its own repos so that if you want to install docker, you point to different repos than redhat. And sometimes the version was a bit off.
Docker was the default in RHEL7 to run containers, since RHEL8 that has changed to Podman which is in the default repos.
 
Docker was the default in RHEL7 to run containers, since RHEL8 that has changed to Podman which is in the default repos

I've noticed some cloud providers, such as Azure, still only support Docker.

I had to get a free Redhat clone and with the CentOS going away, the choice was very limited.
Ran OL9 for a few years.
It is supposed to be 100% compatible with Redhat, rpm and yum and stuff.

Oracle isn't free if you want all the subscriptions.
There are some other choices. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Even Fedora.
We run fedora on a LOT of our servers, and AWS uses it for their back-end.
 
To clarify the above, you can get full functionality in Oracle Linux without any subscriptions. You only start paying when you want to get support. It works exactly like Ubuntu in that regard. Fedora is not a suitable OS for long-term data centers because of how often they change their releases. I mean, if it were that simple there would have been no need for CentOS.

I've run OL8 and OL9 for 4 years, it just works. I like it more than Redhat. It is also suitable for me more than RL, etc. because I can get support if I choose to and Oracle is as big as Redhat so it's nice to have that option. There is no literally no advantage to Rocky or Alma Linux.
 
Fedora is not a suitable OS for long-term data centers because of how often they change their releases.

Plenty of data centers using it. We have 3 locations with over a thousand fedora instances.
The entire AWS stack is built on Fedora. AWS is probably the largest cloud provider.


you can get full functionality in Oracle Linux without any subscriptions.

If you want things like automation manager, you have to pay.
 
Last edited:
I used Rocky for the first time the other day. Now I can't decide if I should go for OL9.3 or the latest Rocky.
I got latest-greatest Xubuntu but need something for the Redhat branch.
 
I think @f33dm3bits has used Rocky, he may have input in that regard.

Also there is now a Beta available for AlmaLInux 9.4

Wiz
 
Plenty of data centers using it. We have 3 locations with over a thousand fedora instances.
The entire AWS stack is built on Fedora. AWS is probably the largest cloud provider.




If you want things like automation manager, you have to pay.


Not that I endorse this, but this is what RH has to say about that. I am more of an open source person myself but managers, who make the decisions love RHEL. It's a God-given 11th Commandment, best thing after sliced bread. In my environment, I fought really hard to include Oracle Linux, it's filling the niche that CentOS used to occupy but aside from a few test machines, it essentially went nowhere. I had to do STIGs to get the boxes compliant and we got ATO (Authority to Operate) on RHEL and that is what we are stuck with. It would have worked just as well on Oracle Linux or Rocky.


Enterprise vs. community Linux distros​

Linux distributions are available as community versions or enterprise versions. A community distro is a free Linux distro primarily supported and maintained by the open source community. An enterprise—or commercial—Linux distro is available through a subscription from a vendor and does not rely solely on community support.
The primary difference between community and enterprise distros is who decides what’s important to users. A community distro’s direction is set by contributors, who choose and maintain packages from the wide variety of open source options. The direction of an enterprise distro is set by a vendor, based on the needs of their customers.
Think about it like this. The Fedora project is the upstream, community distro of Red Hat® Enterprise Linux. Red Hat is the project’s primary sponsor, but thousands of independent developers also contribute to the Fedora project. Each of these contributors, including Red Hat, bring their own new ideas to be tested and debated for inclusion by the larger community into Fedora Linux. This also makes Fedora an ideal place for Red Hat to put features through its own distinct set of tests and quality assurance processes, and those features eventually get incorporated into a version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Learn more about these differences

What are the benefits of an enterprise distro?​

If Linux is free and open source, why would you want to pay for a commercial distribution? Community distros are a great option for people who are new to Linux and don’t have much experience with the command line, or who just want to play around and experiment. If you’re trying to support a server for a long period of time, community distros like Fedora might not be the best choice.
Enterprise distros, like Red Hat Enterprise Linux, are designed to meet business needs and concerns. Red Hat Enterprise Linux offers 10-year life cycle support (as opposed to Fedora’s 2 years of support), so you can better support long-term apps. With an enterprise distro, you get patches, updates, upgrades, expert technical support, and access to training and resources. A community distro relies on forum-based support from its community members, and release cycles aren’t always on a regular cadence.
Also with a commercially supported distro, you get the benefits of the latest open source innovation with the stability and support an enterprise needs. Red Hat has a team of engineers to help improve features, reliability, and security to make sure your infrastructure performs and remains stable—no matter your use case and workload.
 
Myself, I used to dislike RHEL but now hate it with a passion, more or less. I was in a strict RHEL-only environment under a direct guideline from the heavens and I did not like their products like Redhat Satellite (slow and buggy and really an entire operating system in itself, their Virtualization, KVM hypervisor, et cetera - it was like they tried to steer away from any compatibility with the mainstream Linux and say: Look, we are the only way. Their programs were very proprietary. Plus all the managers these days ask for RHEL certificates. RHEL has become the Microsoft of the Linux world, if that makes any sense. They violate the basic Linux tenet of being compatible and similar but their stuff is a Redhat-ism. All the other distros don't even exist on the map when it comes to production environments in these huge data centers. If you want to get a gig in a production data center, better start showing some RHEL certs and they a myriad of these, all very expensive.
 
I used Rocky for the first time the other day. Now I can't decide if I should go for OL9.3 or the latest Rocky.
I got latest-greatest Xubuntu but need something for the Redhat branch.
If you already dislike RHEL, then I would not go with Oracle Linux because that's maintained by a company as well, Oracle. Rocky Linux has corporate sponsors but is officially a community project, that being the reason why I am using it myself.
https://rockylinux.org/faq -> How will you ensure that Rocky Linux truly remains a community enterprise opterating system?
First, we've taken steps to legally protect the Rocky Linux name. This means registering its trademarks and various associated properties to protect them from being controlled by another entity. We've achieved this by establishing them under the Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation (RESF). Next, we've drafted a community charter that defines the organizational structure, objectives, values, and mission behind the legal entity that represents Rocky Linux. Critical in this charter is the establishment of principles that enable and protect the community: transparency, community involvement, open development, and independence. Rocky Linux will never be controlled, purchased, or otherwise influenced by a single entity or organization. Finally, we're architecting and deploying the necessary infrastructure to further enable to the community to contribute to Rocky Linux.
 
I've ran OL for a few years already, all in all it's not bad, you do not have to deal with licensing, registration and all such nonsense. Just install and use it.
However you may be right that a community based distro is the way to go to maintain the free pioneer spirit originally present in the Linux community.
Who can guarantee Oracle Linux won't turn into another CentOS, where they pull the plug on free features.
I will install RockyL tonight.
 
Or AlmaLinux.
Alma Linux isn't an official bug for bug compatible RHEL clone anymore.
In case you missed it, Red Hat announced they will no longer be providing the means for downstream clones to continue to be 1:1 binary copies of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Very quickly, both Jack and I shared some initial thoughts, but we intentionally took our time deciding the next right step for AlmaLinux OS. After much discussion, the AlmaLinux OS Foundation board today has decided to drop the aim to be 1:1 with RHEL. AlmaLinux OS will instead aim to be binary compatible with RHEL*.
 
what does the following mean? Binary compatible is OK but what is not encompassed by this compatibility?


After much discussion, the AlmaLinux OS Foundation board today has decided to drop the aim to be 1:1 with RHEL. AlmaLinux OS will instead aim to be binary compatible with RHEL*.
 
what does the following mean? Binary compatible is OK but what is not encompassed by this compatibility?
It means they might add packages that aren't in RHEL but will the applications that are installed on RHEL will also work on Alma Linux. If you scroll down to the bottom of the second link they explain it there as well in different words.
* Binary/ABI compatibility in our case means working to ensure that applications built to run on RHEL (or RHEL clones) can run without issue on AlmaLinux. Adjusting to this expectation removes our need to ensure that everything we release is an exact copy of the source code that you would get with RHEL. This includes kernel compatibility and application compatibility.
 
what does the following mean? Binary compatible is OK but what is not encompassed by this compatibility?


After much discussion, the AlmaLinux OS Foundation board today has decided to drop the aim to be 1:1 with RHEL. AlmaLinux OS will instead aim to be binary compatible with RHEL*.
Binary compatibility means that output made by one compiler can be linked to software being compiled with other kind of a compiler.

Outputs made by C compilers are binary compatible, but outputs made by ex. C++ compilers are by design not binary compatible.

That's what binary compatibility means in straightforward terms but I don't know if this quote doesn't misuse the term for something else.
 

Staff online

Members online


Top