which O.S. do you use ?

Well, for one thing, RH can be a pain. You have to renew the subscriptions, and so on. Not a real pain, but a bit of extra aggravation. On my home web-cum-mail server I use RH, but for my VMs for testing I use Alma or Rocky. Then I don't have to log into RH's site, go through the extra steps to delete and register various installs. Not saying it is a good reason, but it's a reason--commercially, I suppose businesses do it to save money, though I *think* (but am not sure) they're even letting you use it free in production, but under various conditions.
 
If i ever come into a situation that i need linux again, ill buy another drive and just install linux, rather than polluting my freebsd system with linuxlator.
 
scottro said:
Anyway, at many places RH or a variant is what is used by company policy, and I imagine that JWJones has a boss like my old boss, who insists that the workstations are also RH or a clone, or perhaps they just want to use it on the workstation so that they can predict any issues with the servers, or just get used to the RH way.
Click to expand...
I think the boss just goes with what they have always used for workstations, and the recommendation of the IT guys. There are a couple of people that use Macs they have purchased themselves. We are a small company of about 75 people. I could probably bring my own computer in to use, but installing something else on the company PC would most likely be frowned upon. Other than some basic document/file management on Synology servers, everything we do is web-based. Windows is annoying, yes, but it gets the job done at work. I can use whatever I want at home.
 
Alain De Vos said:
Anyone experiences with Alma linux ?
Click to expand...
Yes, some installations running here, they replaced CentOS. From my experience, I would not recommend cross-upgrading a CentOS 7 machine to Alma Linux 8, that was way too much manual effort. However, the one machine I treated this way is still running stable today. Other than that, rock solid just as RHEL with the same quirks and limitations. systemd is a pain in the posterior. ;)
 
cracauer@ said:
Rocky for example is fairly usable.
Click to expand...
on board the systemd...
recluce said:
systemd is a pain in the posterior.
Click to expand...
There is no way to tear yourself away from systemd. No way. You cut it out, and it climbs back out the window. It's like the sunrise and sunset. Is this an element of some kind of show or what? Why do they recommend everything related to systemd here? This is already becoming, if not the norm, then loyalty here. I didn't come here because of ZFS. I didn't even know that ZFS and recovery environments existed, because FreeBSD version 5 didn't have it yet. I ran away from systemd and the mess in which almost all of Linux is stuck.
 
My guess, and it's only a guess, is because RH threw their weight behind it. I have a friend who loathes RH and loves systemd. I annoy him by telling him that every day he should thank RH for bringing him systemd. He scoffs and says it is so great that if not RH other major systems would have pushed it.
Or maybe there's a lot of truth to the old saying that BSD is for those who love Unix and Linux for those who hate Windows, as systemd keeps getting more and more Windows-y. I'm not sure that those who said Poettering was just an agent for MS trained to wreck Linux are false, and that's why he went to MS, like an extraction of a secret agent. :)
 
USerID said:
on board the systemd...

There is no way to tear yourself away from systemd. No way. You cut it out, and it climbs back out the window. It's like the sunrise and sunset. Is this an element of some kind of show or what? Why do they recommend everything related to systemd here? This is already becoming, if not the norm, then loyalty here. I didn't come here because of ZFS. I didn't even know that ZFS and recovery environments existed, because FreeBSD version 5 didn't have it yet. I ran away from systemd and the mess in which almost all of Linux is stuck.
Click to expand...
I'm the opposite. I don't have anything against systemd, we actually use it extensively @$JOB and I even made custom services for our software. I'm here just because of ZFS after having used it for so many years on Solaris.
 
In the US, at least, it's a common way to make a general reference to your work. In the same way a typical bash environment variable uses $ALLCAPS, it's just referring to one's job, without specifically mentioning the job. For example, maybe you're a system administrator, and don't feel like describing it on a public forum, so, in discussing your work, you just say $JOB, to indicate that you're talking about your work, not your home computer. Or maybe your job is something that's a pain to type.

Anyway it's just shorthand for saying that it's something at work, not home. For instance, if I worked at UPS (I don't), I might say, I have to use windows at $JOB, but I never touch it at home.
 
Yeah, sorry. I'm Italian but I was under the impression that this American expression was commonly used. I confirm that I meant that we use systemd at work and we're pretty happy with that (it's a somewhat big environment, though still less than 10k VMs I believe).

I don't use Linux at home, Freebsd only for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top