
Release for CentOS Linux 7 (1611) on x86_64 derived from RHEL 7.3 - gtirloni
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2016-December/022172.html
======
awill
Glad this is finally out. I still think Red Hat should just make their builds
completely free without a subscription, and charge only for support. CentOS
then wouldn't need to exist (and neither would Oracle Linux). That would help
it compete with Ubuntu in the startup world.

~~~
SEJeff
The thing is though, Redhat really doesn't need to compete with Ubuntu in the
startup world. For the millions of Ubuntu AMIs that run, how much money is
Canonical making from them? Compare that to RedHat, a two billion dollar open
source company.

Ubuntu was focused too long on markets that simply aren't viable from a fiscal
standpoint (See: Ubuntu Phone or much of the excellent desktop work they've
done). Redhat meanwhile has been continuing to focus on the enterprise and
their revenue continues to grow.

~~~
Shorel
Ubuntu server usage has been growing thanks to AWS AMIs, so actually both have
been growing.

I think Ubuntu are just going with a more long term approach.

RedHat just leveraged Oracle compatibility, if you needed Oracle RedHat was
and is the only sane choice; but remove the need for Oracle, and Ubuntu is
then a very strong competitor.

------
rrauenza
Be aware before upgrading that this includes an update to sssd that doesn't
keep backward compatibility with the previous release.

It seems that the default autofs ldap schema in sssd was rfc2307, but had the
wrong default values. So they've fixed the values, but that effectively
changes the defaults of sssd.

This broke autofs where I work ...

See:

[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372814](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372814)

(...I'm not sure why they just didn't make a new setting called 'legacy' as
default and put the old (wrong) values in there.)

------
subway
This brings some really nice updates to IPA, particularly regarding
replication. I'm stoked.

------
rootbear
I hope this fixes some problems I'm having with CentOS 7 as a desktop. At
home, it's fine, but at work, where I'm joined to an Active Directory server
for authentication, it doesn't work so well. Winbindd will slow to a crawl
with 100% CPU utilization. Various suggested fixes I found on support sites
don't help. I tried sssd, but had other problems and I don't like the clumsy
override mechanism I have to use in sssd to set the GCOS field to something
sane instead of the mess that the AD server hands back (and which I don't
control). If this release isn't a significant improvement, I may have to go
back to 6.8 for my desktop, which would be sad. (I am limited by policy with
regard to which flavors of Linux I can run, so switching to Ubuntu, or Mint,
etc., is, sadly, not an option.)

~~~
mwambua
Is Fedora an option? I'm not sure if it will solve your problems in
particular... but it's been working beautifully on my Thinkpad.

------
Tomte
And still the documentation on the web site is only up to CentOS 5.

Even complaining to a team member did not nudge them towards maybe, just maybe
adding a link to the RedHat documentation which they consider the CentOS
documentation, as well.

Hell, if they don't want to help their users find documentation they should
just purge [https://www.centos.org/docs/](https://www.centos.org/docs/) and
let people google for it.

------
hackcrafter
I understand why CentOS/RHEL is preferred by some server admins to Ubuntu
(longer support cycles, hardware drivers etc), but I never got why individual
devs run CentOS versus Ubuntu on their own machines.

Every time I have tried to get tech stacks up and running on CentOS, there is
just more friction/pain than doing the equivalent with Ubuntu LTS.

Am I missing something?

~~~
Aloha
Because odds are, you'll need to deploy onto CentOS if you sell your product
to someone else.

~~~
Avshalom
Also, I like yum's cli more than apt-get's (less than pacman's though)

------
cmurf
Specifically this is based on RHEL 7.3. CentOS 7 has been out for some time.

~~~
Tsiklon
CentOS has a different versioning scheme now with v7. Indeed you're correct
this is effectively CentOS 7.3, but in the project's own vernacular it's
"CentOS 7 (1611)", therefore the OP is technically correct; however to appease
all parties may have benefited from putting both 7.3 and 7 (1611) in the
title.

~~~
cmurf
OK I said based on, where the email the OP cited uses "derived from" \- I'm
uncertain there's a meaningful distinction.

------
cyphar
openSUSE Leap 42.2[1] was also released fairly recently. This is the community
version of SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 SP2. The openSUSE camp doesn't get enough
love IMO (though I am biased).

[1]: [https://software.opensuse.org/422](https://software.opensuse.org/422)

------
pavanky
This is a point release that updates CentOS 7 to (1611). CentOS 7 has been out
for a while now.

~~~
gtirloni
Actually my original title was more precise because it included "(1611)" which
should make that clear. But, apparently, it got changed.

~~~
user982
Well of course it did, it was more than four centuries off.

~~~
forbiddenlake
(1611) is November 2016, not the year.

~~~
noja
Phew then it isn't my abacus that is broken!

~~~
masmullin
One does not preclude the other, your abacus could still be broken.

