55 points

I am not concerned at all, mostly because I do not think that they have taken any anti-user actions recently.

There is no circumstance, where I as a user, either as a personal user or in my professional capacity as someone running production systems, am affected by their source code decision. It’s only an issue if I decide I want to release a Green Hat Linux AND I want to be their customer.

The GPL does not force them to do business with me, and it does NOT require them to distribute source to me if they did not distribute the software to me. Many people may consider this move against the spirit of the GPL, and I think that’s what is causing most of the anger. Well maybe it’s time for a new GPL then that codifies that and explicitly says that, and start the herculean effort of driving adoption of that new license. It didn’t go well for GPLv3 or AGPL.

Now the Fedora telemetry proposal… is just that, a proposal. They are being transparent about “hey we are considering this, what do y’all think?”. Well, they’re certainly getting feedback on what the community thinks about that.

Here, people are angry that they are even considering the idea of telemetry. This is understandable. People treat telemetry like it’s a dirty word, because Microsoft and co. have made it so. Telemetry can be used for nefarious purposes, there is no doubt about that.

I believe that telemetry can be a good thing when it is done correctly. The question of whether the box should be checked by default is an important one, they need to be careful that users actually understand and having it enabled is an informed decision and not something they click past without comprehending. As long as the data collected is restricted, strictly filtered to avoid fingerprinting and leaking user data, this can be used to improve the software. Without any data on how your users experience your software, you are flying blind and throwing darts at your codebase trying to make improvements. The people filing bugs are usually not representative of the average user or their experience. Basic information like “does anyone even use this” or “how reliable is this feature” can help them prioritize their efforts.

I’ll take a trust but verify approach on this. The client side code of Fedora is all open source, so if I have concerns I can take a look at exactly what it is doing and raise the alarm if there’s problems. I’m sure someone will make a Fedora De-telemetrified Spin I can switch to in that case. After all Fedora is not RHEL, their source issue is orthogonal to this one.

If you made it this far, you may think I made some reasonable points… or you think I’m on Red Hat’s payroll (I’m not). Well, I gave it straight as asked, this is how I feel. I’m a user if both RHEL and Fedora and I’m not planning to change that anytime soon.

permalink
report
reply
13 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Fuck that noise. There is no reason to support repeated practices which violate the spirit of open source. There are plenty of decent choices out there which are not fedora and I wish people would use them instead of this ibm nonsense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Not op, but if I’m honest for a laptop user who needs up to date packages. Fedora is the only distro I’ve used which is both stable and user friendly.

An excellent example is when i had Arch installed (both Manjaro and later EndevourOS) when I connected HDMI it never switched over to the new audio source. And whenever I did switch it, it would always go back to the built in speakers if I was to unplug and replug it.

Never had this as an issue in Fedora since it always remembers my last configuration.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Have you tried tumbleweed? As someone who uses both Fedora (or more accurately Nobara) and tumbleweed, my laptop experience on tumbleweed has actually been slightly better on tumbleweed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

I think it will be fine, but I’d personally rather not support their behavior. Arch and Debian are fine for me.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

This is the way

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I use Arch btw

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

Not worried at all. Their source code controversy mostly hurts companies that want to run RHEL without paying IBM, as after these changes distos like Alma Linux and Rockey Linux might diverge more from RHEL and they will have a harder time to guarantee bug-for-bug compatibility.

Fedora is not trying to steal business and government contracts away from RHEL and as a normal user you don’t need this bug-for-bug compatibility anyway. You can just sign up for a RedHat developer account and download RHEL Server for free, this includes a GUI everything you need to run it on a workstation. You can even view the source code trough their website.

So I am not worried that CentOS stream or Fedora will go away, RedHat is not trying to hurt consumers, they just want that enterprises (that are interested in support contracts) actually pay them when they use the work they put into RHEL. If they want a free version, they can still use CentOS stream.

permalink
report
reply
9 points
*

You might not be worried for the code, but the project is a different thing. Red Hat has done some serious damage to its image (centos stream, lay off with record profits, lay off of fedora program manager, nasty circumvention of common open source practices). This will affect fedora. I am a long time debian user, but I often suggest fedora as distro for newcomers. I am not doing it again, and I believe many won’t do as well.

At this point it is difficult to trust red hat on their long term commitments. At work we still use rhel, because all our sys admins are used to it, we have licenses, have been using it for ages. So there will not be a big impact for rhel on existing contracts. But on the future, I will actively try to persuade my whole department at least to move out. It is not easy for us, it will require work, but on long term I do not trust red hat/ibm.

Open source market is a difficult market for IBM’s MBAs. Because trust is more important than money. This ibm problem to understand open source world has always existed. And the recent actions proves they haven’t learned yet. It is a pity that rhel and fedora are the only victims here

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

just

WARNING! half-baked summation ahead!

sign up for a RedHat developer account and download RHEL Server for free,

…for about a year. Renewing is hard and manual. Many people gave up and grabbed CentOS for faster deployments before moving to RHEL, and now do the same with Rocky. It’s always easier than the hoops for the dev programme.

It’s amazing how a 130-odd year-old company watched how apple put its ][ in front of school kids to great success, and then intentionally stops making it easy to run EL when faced with the same opportunity. But, if you’ve read cringely, you’ll get the impression that IBM has been sucking for decades, grabbing anything that floats and standing on its head to remain afloat until that thing suffocates.

As a long-time RH customer, it’s hard to believe the RH dev programme is anything other than brochureware, it’s been hobbled and impaired so much. Really, the only question is whether it was ruined accidentally like Support, or ruined intentionally like CentOS. It could go either way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

I am not worried at all. Fedora and CentOS Stream are upstream of RHEL and I don’t see them giving up community-driven development in either of those projects.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

I guess Debian had it right all along. Free and Open Source Software is important.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Debian had a very long and painful public debate to eventually depend exclusively on systemd, from Red Hat. I’m not so sure they choose wisely to heavily depend upon RH/IBM LGLP code.

The new release is the first ever, I think, to offer non-free software by default.

Personal opinion is that Gentoo had it right all along. They spend a lot of time & man hours ensuring pretty much anything coming from Red Hat, that isn’t being filtered by Linus, is optional. They created eudev, elogind & made Gnome portable again when Red Hat tried to shut down portability. Neddy shows that you can run a bleeding edge system whilst not depending on much at all from Red Hat over the past 15yrs or so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Non free firmware specifically, since it’s a really bad user experience for new users to just not have things work because they don’t have the option to choose to use non-free firmware.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Wow awesome post, you are clearly much more up to date than I am.

Is it true that Bookworm contains non free software in the default release? If so this is sad to hear.

Ive been in the Debian camp for a while now with Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Raspbian etc. and I suffer with systemd maybe I made the wrong choice.

Since you seem very knowledgable I have a question. Why do so many, almost all distros use GNOME rather than KDE as their default DE? KDE has been around a long time, they are free and not heavily corporately sponsored and their product is at least equal or perhaps even better than GNOME. I never understood this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

IBM/RH have been a major contributor to Gnome for over a decade. Yamakuzure, Dantrell, Gentoo, Drobbins and others have helped ensure it remains portable.

My preference is i3/dwm ,or if pushed lxqt or xfce4.

I don’t know much about KDE at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Is it true that Bookworm contains non free software in the default release? If so this is sad to hear.

Non-free firmware, not software. Wi-Fi firmware, GPU firmware, CPU microcode, that sort of thing. Made unfortunately necessary by modern hardware.

I suffer with systemd

What’s the problem?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I even ran systemd for a while on my desktop machine. However it was too complex and buggy even so that I switched back to OpenRC. I never used systemd on my server. Nowdays systemd may be more mature, but I don’t bother to switch. Also I cannot have systemd without binary logs. Yuk! I don’t run as RH-free as Neddy does, but I’ve switched from elogind to seatd. I’d like to burn polkit down (why on earth does it use javascript as config syntax? Why not just plain shell then? Or Lua?), but so far I haven’t.

I’ll stop now. So /rant

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Also I cannot have systemd without binary logs.

This is literally just false.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I use it on my laptop & pi mainly as I’m lazy. Fedora was the only ‘just works’ option for a 2010 macbook, the kernel seemed touchpad & keymap friendly unlike everything else I tried. The systemd out of memory killer made the system completely unusable and disabling the service doesn’t actually disable the service at all which led me to shout some sweary words, eventually found a guide on how to mask systemd services.

Last time I tried Gentoo & Void on my pi I spent a day on it and couldn’t get smooth 2160p playback with Kodi so I tried Raspberry Pi OS which, perhaps unsurprisingly, ‘just worked’ in this department.

I will get round to converting them at some point as I don’t plan on upgrading Fedora beyond 37 and the pi4 2160p playback is solvable when I have a little time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Debian had a very long and painful public debate to eventually depend exclusively on systemd, from Red Hat.

As far as I know, systemd is only the default.

At any rate, systemd is already in good working order, and it can and will be forked if necessary. More concerning is stuff like the Dogtag PKI system, which probably isn’t popular enough to be forked.

I’m not so sure they choose wisely to heavily depend upon RH/IBM LGLP code.

What exactly does “LGLP” mean?

The new release is the first ever, I think, to offer non-free software by default.

Firmware, not software. Wi-Fi firmware, GPU firmware, CPU microcode, that sort of thing. Made unfortunately necessary by modern hardware.

Don’t consider it a betrayal of Debian ideals, because it’s not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Debian only support systemd, if you want systemd free Debian there are forks of the project like Devuan…but then you are no longer running an OS officially supported by the Debian foundation.

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

LGPL, less user freedom, more room to entangle with proprietary crapware.

Firmware is software.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

If RH abandoned systemd today it would forever be better than sysvinit. It’s the best tool for the job by miles. A good alternative didn’t exist.

Personally I lost interest in Debian for their hesitation. The community is more interested in being conservative than making good software.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

I don’t doubt that relying on Red Hat’s code makes life easier.

My needs are minimal. I can get by on openrc, runit, systemd or sysv.

Curious to see where s6 goes.

I lost interest in Arch when Tom Gunderson was aggressively promoting systemd whilst being funded by Red Hat, I was sad when Debian made the decision to rely on Red Hat to take care of the low level system plumbing.

My tinfoil hat from around 2010 still seems relevant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Uh, yeah, Debian is about being stable. Being conservative is aligned with that. When you’re a cornerstone distro, you want to be sure about the changes you’re making, especially when they are likely to have long term, far reaching consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Linux

!linux@lemmy.ml

Create post

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word “Linux” in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

  • Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
  • No misinformation
  • No NSFW content
  • No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

Community stats

  • 9.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.1K

    Posts

  • 170K

    Comments