Hacker News Reader

We don't change the expected versions. We might patch/backport more to them if there are issues, but the versions remain.

Basically the goal is still to fit the exact situation you just brought up. I'm not aware of this ever not being the case if it weren't to be the case for some reason, then we have a problem we need to fix.

All of the extra stuff we do, patch, etc. is with exactly what you just stated in mind.

View on HN

I'll be installing a set of small servers in the near future. I'll be retrying Alma in a couple of them, to give it another chance.

As I said, in some cases Rocky is a better CentOS replacement than Alma is.

But to be crystal clear, I do not discount Alma as a distribution or belittle the effort behind it. Derivative, clone or from scratch, keeping a distro alive is a tremendous amount of work. I did it, and know it.

It's just me selecting the tools depending on a suitability score, and pragmatism. Not beef, not fanaticism, nothing in that vein.

Sustainability is one of the core reasons why we are not using RHEL SRPMs to build AlmaLinux. RH doesn't want us doing that, and doing so would be unsustainable and bring into question the future of AlmaLinux as it can, and likely will, turn into a game of cat/mouse getting those SRPMs :)

Let us know if you have any issues!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com