this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
14 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
114 readers
1 users here now
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, I feel the 1:1 compatibility issue is overrated.
We want a stable distro that has ABI compatibility throughout the 5-10year support cycle, I don't really care if it's 1:1 compatible with RHEL.
For the niche or specific usecases where RHEL compatibility is needed, they offer their UBI container.
In the past I did care more about it, because we were using specific Puppet modules and other provisioning tools that were validated against specific RHEL versions, but in the age of containerization it's much less of an issue.
It might be an issue with certain ISO compliance, because we can't just blindly throw a RHEL 8 CIS security benchmark script at a base Alma image anymore and expect everything to work fine. But it's not a dealbreaker in my sector. We can reach compliance by making up our own benchmarks. The sectors that don't have this luxury are probably already on RHEL for different reasons.
With what Rocky tried to do to remain 1:1 compatible with RHEL (Pretty much leaking and stealing the rpm sources) I'll stay with Alma, even if they are no longer "bug compatible".