Red Hat RHEL 9 release

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-defines-new-epicenter-innovation-red-hat-enterprise-linux-9

by ossusermivami • 4 years ago

93 85 4 years ago

VWWHFSfQ• 4 years ago

The word "Microsoft" appears 12 times in this press release.

I always thought Microsoft would end up acquiring Red Hat, but IBM did it instead. Now I think they'll acquire Canonical. I think it's only a matter of time before we'll have a Microsoft Linux.

ohthehugemanate• 4 years ago

https://github.com/microsoft/CBL-Mariner

Microsoft's linux platforms presently run mostly on Ubuntu. You're right that one way out of that dependency would be to buy Canonical. They chose to make their own top level Linux distro instead.

rajishx2• 4 years ago

reading it from the README it does seem they use fedora/spec for packaging? is it ubuntu repackaged with rpm?

rajishx2• 4 years ago

to be fair and try to dismiss your comment, it does seem the word Microsoft has been associated a lot with opensource companies and technologies lately.

bityard• 4 years ago

To give MS credit, they are _much_ more friendly to open source than I ever believed they could be. I think the popularity of Linux and Mac for web/cloud development (which is almost entirely based around open source code) more or less forced their hand.

xuhu• 4 years ago

AWS or EC2 appear 13 times in the article, maybe it's just an emphasis on cloud vendors they were after.

VTimofeenko• 4 years ago

Well we already had Microsoft Unix:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix

lightbulbjim• 4 years ago

I've been waiting for Microsoft to acquire Canonical.

nickstinemates• 4 years ago

I think it almost happened once. Right before wsl launched.

Thats what I heard anyway

Lammy• 4 years ago

It could have been AOL :) https://web.archive.org/web/20020123134105/http://www.washte...

sph• 4 years ago

Canonical has certainly done its hardest to align with Microsoft.

lproven2• 4 years ago

Could you explain that, or give some examples?

I am baffled by your comment. I can't think of anything that fits.

parasense4• 4 years ago

I half suspect Microsoft was bidding for Red Hat, and potentially that provoked IBM into action. It's just a theory, but Red Hat for many years was setup to avoid hostile takeovers from the likes of IBM with so called poison pill stocks or whatever.

sascha_sl• 4 years ago

Interesting timing, Fedora 36 released today.

RHEL 9 is surprisingly modern, being based on Fedora 34 which itself still has about a month of support remaining.

totierne22• 4 years ago

I like the number 8.

totierne22• 4 years ago

I thought 8 was relatively recent, I only started moving on to it. I am out of the loop, I do not know what I am missing out on in the latest 9 update and kernel. I moved on to mac/brew on the desktop 5 years ago. I use it as UNIX with supported hardware.

tadbit3• 4 years ago

Given what Red Hat and the CentOS project did to CentOS 8 I have no desire to use RHEL ever again. Right now it's just Ubuntu LTS and Debian for my needs. Working on eliminating RHEL at work as well, wherever I can.

rjgonza• 4 years ago

Amen! I share these thoughts and plan of action completely.

geerlingguy• 4 years ago

For the few systems I upgraded to CentOS 8 back before it was killed, I switched them to Rocky Linux (Alma's also a good choice).

I'm still waiting a bit longer to see whether I'll keep my toes in the RHEL-ecosystem-waters, or if I finish moving everything to Ubuntu LTS and Debian.

tadbit3• 4 years ago

I think the work being done with Rocky and Alma linux is great! Many kudos to them.

However, I'm worried history will simply repeat itself or RHEL will make downstreaming difficult in some way, which could kill those projects.

rahen• 4 years ago

At least Debian cannot and will never be bought, will always be there, has an army of contributors (some of them kernel developers), and is basically the only enterprise grade free distribution.

Now just add some RHEL/CentOS containers on top where needed and forget about the RH lock-in.

imglorp• 4 years ago

RHEL/CentOS containers ... RH lock-in

So if a non-IP-lawyer reads the redistribution terms of the RH Universal Base Images, there are some very dubious implications in there, such as #22 and #42.

  https://developers.redhat.com/articles/ubi-faq#

Has anyone done a third party analysis of their EULA? My org, an ISV, may need some legal cycles to avoid stepping in this trap.

I'd be just fine avoiding UBI because of that, but there are some orgs whose security posture demands only UBI images are allowed in their domain so ISV's may be forced to pay to play.

krnlpnc2• 4 years ago

It would be quite nice to see Debian adopt a longer term release model. In a lot of environments that was the deciding factor for RHEL/CentOS. A stable OS with security support for a decade.

The current Debian release cycle is closer to 2 years which means a big increase in testing and OS upgrade cycles.

janejeon• 4 years ago

I'm completely out of the loop (I only use Debian). What did RH do w/ version 8?

trynewideas• 4 years ago

Eliminated it in favor of a less stable rolling release edition. https://www.zdnet.com/article/centos-linux-8-is-about-to-die...

tadbit3• 4 years ago

CentOS 8 was supposed to be supported into 2029. Approximately a year or so after being released that was changed and would only be supported into 2021.

Many people in the CentOS community, even RHEL employees, tried to play it off like they never meant to support it so long, but some time after the announcement they confirmed they did indeed strip away 8 years of the planned support.

This burned a lot of people that had already started deploying systems using CentOS 8 into Production. A lot of time and money has been spent by many people, organizations, and companies rectifying this situation.

rubyist5eva2• 4 years ago

I just switched to Alma Linux, it was nbd.

lmeyerov2• 4 years ago

Yep. We got burned out on the lies RHEL8 pushed to serious orgs (utilities, gov agencies, etc.) around podman readiness & replaceability over docker. I'm glad people are getting their bonuses and good for docker to have competition, but don't abuse your trusted advisor & monopoly position to mess with societal infrastructure and the admins keeping it going. Before we promoted other OS's for our AI users as a matter of general GPU readiness but were game for supporting RHEL, but now we actively recommend against it as too untrustworthy going forward.

ungamedplayer3• 4 years ago

I feel you could run docker on rhel 8. How was having an option worse?

mekster2• 4 years ago

How is it so different? It's still less bleeding edge than Fedora.

It always makes me feel people are making such a big fuss about it being slightly ahead of RHEL than slightly behind which has the benefit of having fixes earlier than RHEL.

If you got a problem, you could always pay for RHEL.

rurban• 4 years ago

Giving up completely on technical competence and using a properly maintained distro? Debian/Ubuntu may be useful for harmless hobby users, but certainly not for anything serious.

IMHO Debian and Ubuntu are more harmful than Redhat

tkuraku3• 4 years ago

Redhat is my favorite Linux distro for my workstation. It just works and is rock solid. I wish they had a node locked license option like windows pro workstation,https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/d/windows-10-pro-for-worksta..., for $300-500 for a major version instead of always having to manage subscriptions.

nvr219• 4 years ago

What hardware do you use it on

tkuraku3• 4 years ago

At work I have a dell t7920 desktop. At home I have a custome built desktop from 2014 with an Intel i7. Works like a charm.

colechristensen2• 4 years ago

When RedHat officially supported a piece of hardware, and your large enterprise software officially supported RedHat, it was a pretty good setup.

Lots of things which are otherwise a mess in Linux just weren't.

Of course much of my experience on this was with things like $10k per seat software on a $5k workstation or similar.

One of the reasons containerization is so popular is poorly supported software (on ubuntu mostly) just being broken and hard to work with combined with a pretty bad way to write and manage packages (apt).

mikewave2• 4 years ago

a pretty bad way to write and manage packages

Cool, good to know this nearly 30 year old conflict is still just as active as ever. Tens of thousands of working DEB packages notwithstanding.

sofixa2• 4 years ago

Don't you struggle with old/obsolete packages? Stuff like Docker, Wayland, but not only, need recent kernels and libraries.

antihero• 4 years ago

Is there going to be an equivalent Rocky Linux?

rubyist5eva2• 4 years ago

Of course, eventually - there is also Alma Linux which already has a beta available and the stable release will probably be ready in 2 weeks or so.

maxnoe• 4 years ago

https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/rhel8-6-has-been-released-do...

If I had to guess, we may have a [8.6] release sometime this weekend or starting next week as we also continue to work on Rocky 9.

hollerith2• 4 years ago

I always thought Rocky (and the old CentOS) would be simply an exactly copy of RHEL with the trademarked text and images removed, but "we also continue to work on Rocky 9", contradicts that.

ianai3• 4 years ago

How long until the RHEL tests are updated to 9? Started aiming at 8 recently.

ungamedplayer3• 4 years ago

What rhel tests?

ianai3• 4 years ago

RHCSA/RHCE

mbreese2• 4 years ago

Are there release notes available? What I’d really like to know is what has changed from 8? There’s usually a few major changes with the major version bump, so that’s what I was hoping to find here (or really linked from the press release, but I couldn’t find it).

tkuraku3• 4 years ago

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

mbreese2• 4 years ago

Thanks for that. From there I got to here:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp...

Which lists the differences between RHEL 8 and 9.

nick238• 4 years ago

Python 2 packages gone, so just need to wait for RHEL/CentOS 8 to die in 2029 and Python 2 should finally be gone?

Macha• 4 years ago

CentOS 8 is already dead, thanks to their latest changes.

Red Hat gets paid for RHEL 8, they can pay someone to port stuff to Python 2 for their customers if they want it, but I believe the default python there is 3.6, with just an option to install 2.7 if you want it.

RuggedPineapple• 4 years ago

Final version number where it can still be confused with the old Red Hat Linux.

mekster2• 4 years ago

Would use RHEL variants if it wasn't for not supporting zfs as good as Ubuntu.

zfs is too good to miss out and Ubuntu makes it so easy to use it.

Ubuntu LTS is all that matters to me.

aborsy• 4 years ago

ZFS is a major advantage of Ubuntu. ZFS on root is shipped by checking a box at installation. Great!

happyjack2• 4 years ago

I have a legitimate question. How big is "desktop" Linux to RHEL (or Ubuntu, etc.) bottom line?

I ran RHEL 7 and 8 workstation when I used to work in engineering / science (not development or comp sci.) and used specialty simulation software and did a lot of Windows emulation via Virtualbox and programming in Octave and Mathematica. I really did enjoy RHEL workstation, and GNOME was a good daily driver. Lot of packages for RHEL (especially with rpm fusion + fusion tainted), although some can be very old. I used it for my 9-5, and even ran a laptop with CentOS. Without the need for specialty simulators, I've converted to the Apple world, though.

Server subscriptions pays the bills for RHEL (governments, banks, large companies, etc.). Is there a real market for "workstation?" Do they development a graphical OS as a community project? Anyone know the future of it? Are there enough paying customers at Universities and defense contractors using workstation that justify development of GNOME, Evolution, graphical programs, etc.?

Would love to hear people's thoughts.

kX4A8o4mVmX8aW• 4 years ago

I have no insider info, this is just what I think.

The Linux desktop is Red Hat's complement in the sense of commoditizing their complement. They don't actually care about it as such, but it needs to exist and they want it to be dirt cheap and highly available so it will drive customers to the products they do care about. Without it, they're just selling a grab bag of server/CLI/web-based tools that require a fleet of Windows or Mac desktops to manage, a very different value proposition to being a complete IT solution.

happyjack2• 4 years ago

Mirrors the previous comment. Makes sense to invest in Workstation and help it sell to the big boys and show that they have "full service" solutions.

hollerith2• 4 years ago

One thing RHEL's GUI does is make RHEL more real in the minds of prospective purchasers of RHEL server licenses.

Windows has a big advantage: the prospect has probably personally used the product. Although Red Hat's attempt to replicate that advantage has failed (i.e., the vast majority of IT executives still run Windows on their personal computers), it remains the case that it is advantageous if the RHEL salesman can pull out a laptop running RHEL and show it to the prospect. "Show, don't tell," I believe is a saying among salesmen.

Also, if the salesman's laptop is running RHEL, that is an costly signal to the prospect that Red Hat believes in its product enough to use it to support the IT needs of its salesmen. It is more persuasive than having the saleman tell the prospect, "Yes, my laptop runs Windows, admittedly, but it is communicating with a RHEL server, where all the data I need for my job is actually kept."

Summary: desktop RHEL helps sell server RHEL.

Red Hat RHEL 9 release

Related Stories