eraser215

bootc is a CNCF project now, so anybody can get on board.

Totally. Appliances are perfect candidates for this tech.

Arguably yes. I think the big improvement is that an upgrade is really just switching from image A to image B, rather than dozens to hundreds of individual package transactions. Furthermore parts of the system are fully mutable (e.g. /etc) allowing you to run automation against a system post install for more customisation.

... and it works fabulously. I have been running Bluefin (same folks as Bazzite) from one of these templates for about 6 months and it has been a near on flawless experience. I have moved from Fedora 40->41->42 without having to touch a traditional "upgrade".

https://projectbluefin.io/

Flatpak doesn't auto update out of the box on any distro I have used.

I'm all in on bluefin-dx too, and Bluetooth is working fine for me in my lenovo x1 carbon. Fingers crossed you can sort your issue out.

Fair call. In any case I think you'll find things moving towards bootc and away from having to know rpm-ostree at all. The bootc documentation for fedora is pretty good and the Universal Blue project has built some awesome distros that use bootc.

Which ABI has red hat broken between minor versions? Can you give some examples that weren't bugs that got fixed?

Alma is based on centos stream. Centos stream is red hat.

But you'll build your business on software you get for free on the internet with absolutely no commitment behind it?

What breaking changes do those upgrades introduce? Is there any compatibility guide?

... And we all know that rolling upgrades frequently introduce breaking changes that don't make sense for enterprise environments. To your (great) point: Customers pay companies like red hat for software stability, both in how it works and how their software interfaces to it.

Is the problem ultimately to do with your configurations on your centos 7 boxes? Converting to rhel should be easy if you aren't doing anything that red hat wouldn't support in rhel.

CentOS stream is red hat.

We all know it's just made up stuff to feed the narrative of evil IBM making RH evil. Not even the plausible scenario of IBM changing the source code licencing of hashicorp software back to something genuinely open can change people's minds.

Which alley do you mean?

"Or are they just planning to ship Redhat verbatim and never make their own stuff?"

That is their stated mission.

[flagged]

Your final sentence proves just how little you understand about FOSS. Thanks for making it easy.

Good point. In pure play OSS nobody has come close, for sure. My understanding is that the only other software company that had the same sustained growth trend was salesforce. Could be wrong though.

I spotted that too. By contrast I'd prefer this person shouted it out loud without code so that everybody could see them for who they are.

Almost everything you said here is complete garbage.

Underperform the rest of the tech sector? No... 70+ quarters of successive double digit growth until the acquisition.

Mismanaged the company with respect to virtualisation? You're conflating mismanaging the company with possible strategic errors in virtualisation.

Destroy FOSS spirit? Absolutely the opposite. He is held in the highest esteem by every red hatter I have ever spoken to. Not only that, but he made the effort to do red hat training to learn the tech in the early days. How has he destroyed any FOSS spirit through his actions? Give an example.

Everyone has macbooks now? No. Sellers generally do, I'll give you that, but technical staff are mostly using Fedora or RHEL. Flexibility has always been a huge part of the employee experience.

Standard corporate welfare initiatives for liberal arts majors? You sound like an angry white man who can't stand that people other than yourself may have their disadvantage recognised nowadays. Stop feeling so threatened.

Why are you so bitter?

You do know red hat contributes far more to upstream kubernetes than suse/rancher don't you? You know they helped google open source it, don't you? Rancher certainly got the jump on red hat for lighter weight deployments, but to claim that it is more kubernetes than the red hat offering shows you don't actually understand what you're comparing.

How dare a vendor come up with an idea, pay people to execute on that idea, and the gasp try to make money from it? Outrageous!

Oracle, SUSE, and Greg Kurtzer have zero interest in not profiting from this.

It's been made abundantly clear by many people in many places that this isn't an IBM thing.

100%

How is red hat being the only contributor a good thing?

Yes you can.

https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/new-year-new-red-hat-enterpri...