Rocky Linux: A CentOS replacement by the CentOS founder

I think the name and the logo is good. Don't listen to the people who just keep talking and not helping! Good to see that CentOS cofonder picked this up and now became a founder of Rocky Linux. This shows dedication and rock solid background. Rocky Linux will be a project to follow, help and use in production environment. Thank you for all your hard work!

Whats missing is an analysis of why CentOS failed. I think Rocky Linux needs to put out a plan how they will make themselves financially viable as we&#x27;ve had 3 high profile RHEL respins go down in the last 10 years.<p>CentOS failed twice, it ran out of money in 2014 and was rescued back then by Redhat sponsership. Again in 2020. Another widely used RHEL respin was Scientific Linux which mothballed when RHEL 7 was released.<p>There seems to be lots of potential users but not lots of potential money for a RHEL respin.

Anyone believe that I will, at some point, be able to point my CentOS 8.x configuration at the Rocky Linux repo and just upgrade to it? That would be ideal. I realized GPG keys will need to be replaced, etc.

Can someone explain why it’s not exceedingly simple to clone the existing Centos concept? Isn’t all the code that does the builds, artwork replacement, etc all open source?<p>I would think that rebranding CentOS as Rocky is a rather trivial process of replatforming all the codebase and replacing any “Centos” with “Rocky”.

One thing to consider, for the folks that assume everyone on CentOS is a parasite allergic to paying for software... CentOS is heavily used in the HPC academic organizations, in part because paying licensing fees for an OS on 2k+ nodes isn’t workable in academia.

Does anyone know what exactly what were the legal&#x2F;financial mechanics of RedHat &#x27;absorbing&#x27; CentOS in the first place? Is &quot;CentOS&quot; a trademark? Is the CentOS logo trademarked? Who exactly owned the servers that CentOS was distributed from? Did CentOS have people on the payroll who took jobs at RedHat? (Did CentOS have a payroll in the first place?)

&gt; The CentOS project recently announced a shift in strategy for CentOS. Whereas previously CentOS existed as a downstream build of its upstream vendor (it receives patches and updates after the upstream vendor does), it will be shifting to an upstream build (testing patches and updates before inclusion in the upstream vendor.<p>Wow, I haven&#x27;t been following this very closely - but isn&#x27;t that Fedora they&#x27;re describing? At least... traditionally...<p>Fedora was upstream, RHEL was stabalized in the middle, and CentOS was downstream - regarding patch releases and features, etc.<p>Is Fedora going away too?

Looking forward to give this a spin at home to see if it&#x27;ll be the future of non-RH based linux servers, although it&#x27;ll take a long time before people are willing to throw it in prod like they do with CentOS. No way to change that except time.<p>Also it&#x27;s interesting that some people defined Rocky as being &#x27;unstable&#x27; when others read it as being &#x27;solid as a rock&#x27;.

&gt; Additionally, support for CentOS Linux 8 has been cut short, from May 31, 2029 to December 31, 2021.<p>That has to be disappointing for the people who adopted CentOS for its stability and long-term support.

Setting up shop under a new name can be stomach-churningly daunting. Best of luck to Gregory and the rest of the team.

I knew what CentOS was, but never followed it because I&#x27;ve never personally had use for it. Still, I appreciate what it did and was glad to have it as an option should I ever need a super stable distro in the future.<p>That said, I think the FAQ is missing an answer for a critical question: What ultimately drove CentOS to its regrettable fate and what will Rocky Linux do to avoid a similar misfortune?

This is the best case scenario here.

What&#x27;s the point of keeping the CentOS brand at this point? Why not have RHEL and RHEL Stream?

I wish RL all the best, but I&#x27;m glad I switched to debian-stable for server workloads (mostly Docker anyway). If anything, the story of CentOS (and White Box Linux before that) tells me a RedHat clone isn&#x27;t a feasible project economically in the long run. So it may be better to put your money where your mouth is. Of my customers, none had used CentOS&#x2F;RH as base image for Docker builds anyway.

I have not used CentOS but I have considered it. If OpenSUSE did not exist, that is probably what I would use. Or perhaps now, Rocky Linux

While it&#x27;s really sad that CentOS 8 will meet it&#x27;s end so soon, for those who are on CentOS 7, the planned EOL is still 2024.<p>And if that applies to you, that&#x27;s plenty of time for Rocky Linux to get rolling. Just a thought.

What I missed in the announcements of CentOS news and the obvious disappointment is the talk about whether Stream is actually a path you can take forward.<p>I put together what we actually know about the CentOS -&gt; Stream migration so far[0]. I personally might give stream a chance although if Rocky is released, I imagine it a no-brainer.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nts.strzibny.name&#x2F;migrating-centos-to-centos-stream-8&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nts.strzibny.name&#x2F;migrating-centos-to-centos-stream-...</a>

Devil&#x27;s advocate: why should I choose this yet-to-exist distribution over something already existing, such as Oracle Linux?<p>The most common argument (Oracle is evil and litigious. Therefore, using Oracle Linux will result in me being sued) honestly seems like FUD.<p>All RHEL downstream distributions rebuild the same SRPMs that RHEL provides. Doing a quick comparison over some common packages (kernel, httpd, openssl, etc.) between CentOS 8.3 (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;vault.centos.org&#x2F;8.3.2011&#x2F;BaseOS&#x2F;Source&#x2F;SPackages&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;vault.centos.org&#x2F;8.3.2011&#x2F;BaseOS&#x2F;Source&#x2F;SPackages&#x2F;</a>) Oracle Linux 8.3 (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;yum.oracle.com&#x2F;repo&#x2F;OracleLinux&#x2F;OL8&#x2F;baseos&#x2F;latest&#x2F;x86_64&#x2F;index_src.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;yum.oracle.com&#x2F;repo&#x2F;OracleLinux&#x2F;OL8&#x2F;baseos&#x2F;latest&#x2F;x8...</a>) shows that they are indeed byte identical (with the exception of certain spec files including debranding patches).<p>What is the value of having a separate RHEL derivative? It isn&#x27;t as if the &quot;community&quot; can propose&#x2F;submit any changes, since any changes will cease to make the downstream distribution a &quot;bug for bug&quot; compatible RHEL derivative. If I actually wanted to participate in the larger RHEL-derivative community, I would need to actually submit my changes to the CentOS stream project.

I am really interested to know why should anyone go with this when Debian or Ubuntu LTS exist. The two later have not changed their policies in the last decade, and they have a clear path for upgrading. CentOS was always a clear choice for device drivers support, but I never understood the stability claims.

Welp...that didn&#x27;t take long. I expected something like this would happen in light of the recent changes over at CentOS.

<p><pre><code> What is the vision for Rocky Linux? A solid, stable, and transparent alternative for production environments, developed by the community for the community. </code></pre> Hence the name Rocky Linux, I suppose? Solid as a rock.<p>Although I&#x27;ll be inclined to think of it as series of movies. Perhaps even split wood before installing Rocky 5?

The fact that a majority of the comments are whining about the name really shows you the worst part about open source: the non-contributing but highly entitled part of the community.<p>If you don’t like the name, launch your own CentOS replacement. There’s no better time than now. If there’s one thing this project does not need right now, it’s armchair marketing experts.<p>If you do care about a viable CentOS replacement, do something. Contribute code, money or expertise. The last thing any new and vulnerable project needs is another “idea guy” or a new logo.

I have not seen much mention of alternatives to RHEL besides Oracle Linux. Another excellent alternative exists here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;scientificlinux.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;scientificlinux.org&#x2F;</a>

OT: What is the origin of RockyText font in <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rockylinux.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rockylinux.org&#x2F;</a> ?

Do we know what kind of work is required and what are the kind of contributors they&#x27;re looking for?<p>Happy to help wherever I can.

Someone care to explain <i>why</i> did CentOS switch from downstream to upstream builds? I guess there is a reason.

Rocky makes me think ‘unstable’ and ‘uncertain’ which seems at odds with the stated vision of the distribution. Might make for a tough sell.

Just Linux doing what Linux does.

I feel like the future solution should be a dig at IBM for being a evil company and RH for selling out.

I hate the name.

Thank you!

I&#x27;m so glad I build all my servers on Debian.

I doubt how successful this will turn out to be because of the following reasons:<p>- The old CentOS had a brand value, which Rocky Linux has to earn back all over again.<p>- The old Red Hat was nice to CentOS or at least wasn&#x27;t particularly hostile. That does not mean IBM will be nice too.<p>- It may be too short a notice for current CentOS users to wait for Rocky Linux to come through. They may already move away to other alternatives like Debian or Ubuntu or Amazon Linux or whatever fits their use case.<p>- If because of some miracle, Rocky Linux turns out to be just as successful as CentOS, there is a chance that either Red Hat or a competitor will end up taking control of it too. Corporate sponsorship is too lucrative to decline. So, it will end up with the same fate as CentOS.

Great, <i>another</i> Linux distro... I am trying to use <i>something</i>, but I just can&#x27;t.<p>Spending my time fixing problems instead of doing actual work is fun, for a while.<p>Every damn time I start this one laptop with Linux, trying to get away from Windows 10, there&#x27;s something to fix.<p>Oh, the undervolt is not being applied, time to build the whole thing again.<p>Oh, restart causes it to wank the hard drive indefinitely for some reason.<p>Oh, shutdown is <i>still</i> not working, glad I got a power button.<p>Nouveau glitches.<p>Bluetooth has disconnected and just refuses to work again.<p>Audio recording is not working again.<p>Video encoding is not working again.<p>Video <i>playback</i> is not working again...<p>And it runs so well in a virtual machine.<p>Why can&#x27;t people just band together and create one good Linux distro for the desktop. Rhetorical question, I guess.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rocksdb.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rocksdb.org&#x2F;</a> from fb

There is going to be a rocky road ahead...<p>Why not just Rock Linux ? If you want corporate customers, use a corporate name.<p>To those who disagree, would you be comfortable telling your board of directors that you use &quot;insert offensive word&quot; Linux ?

The next CentOS will be where the core developers who are actually contributing to project will move. However, branding does matter if you want enterprise following. Rocky does sound unprofessional.

The branding here I think is a big issue. The name &quot;Rocky Linux&quot; sounds too homebrew and unprofessional. CentOS sounds Enterprise-ish. I find it hard to believe any corporate client would take it seriously.