

VMware just created its first Linux OS and it's rubbish - mkesper
https://lwn.net/Articles/641141/#Comments

======
chronid
Quoting a comment:

    
    
        In other words, perfectly ordinary behavior in the proprietary world.
    

I spend 90% of my time at work fighting monsters like that (another juicy
example: a proprietary and broken pseudo-clones of yum born from an intern's
summer project 4-5 years ago).

~~~
antocv
Same here, the shit I put up with...

------
nailer
Side note: VMware ESX was a Linux based OS (yes, vmlinuz loaded vmware via
kernel modules, not the other way around as VMware likes to tell people, you
can see this if you watch ESX boot).

~~~
hnmullany
This is a persistent and incorrect story. The proprietary esx kernel takes
over from the initial linux boot. The esx kernel schedules running VMs, not
the linux kernel.

~~~
nailer
That may or may not be true, but it doesn't affect that the Linux kernel
module interface is a really bad place to put your valuable, proprietary,
until ESXi not-ported-elsewhere IP.

------
chippy
Title should be the original title, really...

"VMware just created its first Linux OS, and it’s container-friendly"

~~~
onli
Not really, as the submission is not the article, but the comment below.

------
mkesper
The comments at LWN.net give more insight then the original article at
NetWorkWorld
([http://www.networkworld.com/article/2911944/virtualization/v...](http://www.networkworld.com/article/2911944/virtualization/vmware-
just-created-its-first-linux-os-and-its-container-friendly.html))

------
ansible
So is there anything to recommend Photon vs. something like RancherOS other
than better integration with VMware?

------
astkel
This isn't surprising to me, coming from VMWare. Try using an API for any of
their software projects. They break the principle of least surprise far too
often.

------
gaius
Flagged for misleading headline

------
mdeslaur
What a misleading title.

------
mdekkers
I stopped reading the press release when I read "yum" and "rpm" \-- this thing
needs Ubuntu as the build-OS btw...

~~~
kondor6c
Why? RPM based distributions are running in the majority of companies, and
VMWare targets companies that can afford to pay it's licensing structure.

~~~
mdekkers
I don't like RPM or Yum. In my experience with using it, it has usually done
more harm than good. What other companies use is up to them, but it isn't
suitable for me. Argumentum ad populum is a fallacy.

~~~
kondor6c
RPM is really a great packaging system. It has a lot of features that DEB's do
not, for example you can roll back yum/RPM transaction's if you like (yum
history undo ${id}). Another example is to get a list of the last packages
that were installed "rpm -qa --last". DEB's seem to prefer to write things to
files instead, so they'll write to /var/lib/dpkg/info/*

One place where I think that DEB's win, is in building a new package. It was
pretty easy for me to make a DEB than an RPM, and the fact that I had a hard
time finding which RPM macros did function XXYY.

I think the reason why many don't like fedora/centos is the fact that packages
aren't easily accessible, because Ubuntu will enable the universe repo by
default whereas fedora/centos you would have to install that on your own.

If I can help you, feel free to reach out to me.

~~~
mdekkers
I have had many issues with RPM and YUM breaking a system, something that
hasn't happened to me deb-based systems. I find rolling custom packages and
running an in-house deb repo and mirror to be easy and very reliable. There
are quite a few things I don't like about CentOS/Fedora/RH are laid out. Yes,
some of these are simply personal preferences, and some of these are based on
technical requirements.

Live and let live - if it works for you, that's great, I don't have an issue
with that. Unfortunately, it seems people have an issue with me not adhering
to their own world view - pity HN is going that way.

I do genuinely appreciate your offer for help, many thanks :)

~~~
ominous_prime
No, people are downvoting you because your first comment was about dismissing
the article outright when you got to rpm+yum.

You haven't made any useful comments regarding the article, just continuing on
about how you have _personally_ had non-specific problems with yum and rpm.

