AlmaLinux stays Red Hat Enterprise Linux compatible without Red Hat code
Making a RHEL clone from CentOS stream is absolutely using &quot;Red Hat code&quot;.<p>Also, isn&#x27;t CentOS stream already ABI compatible? Just occasionally ahead of RHEL?<p>I really don&#x27;t understand the outrage from RH cracking down on clones. With entitled CentOS users going &quot;I don&#x27;t want stream, despite it being a rock solid gratis platform; I want the 10 year support battle tested code, but without giving you any money&quot;.<p>I do understand some users of RHEL&#x2F;CentOS-of-yore rely on other vendors that only support specific versions of RHEL (looking at you, Infiniband drivers..), but those vendors could (and should) be encouraged to support Stream and other distributions (if only at the source level), not contribute further to the RHEL monoculture.<p>With Rocky and Alma we&#x27;re right back where we started. Sad panda.<p>I think what&#x27;s really needed is a competitor to RHEL in the scientific computing&#x2F;HPC space. Though it&#x27;s a difficult market to penetrate. SuSE has tried for ages, and Ubuntu just isn&#x27;t up for it (also making custom deb repos are much harder than RPM).<p>After following a couple of links I learned that Rocky gets their sources from spinning up RHEL cloud VMs and similar shenanigans. Could they not just buy a single subscription and get direct access to everything?<p>In fact I&#x27;m glad Red Hat cracked down to prevent predators like Oracle to just rebrand the distro and call it &quot;unbreakable Linux&quot; as if they built it. Well they still can if they pay for it. This monoculture, and especially focus on bug-for-bug compatibility is just ridiculous. Alma is doing something different by simply focusing on ABI compatibility and can otherwise aim for security or performance, but I&#x27;m afraid most people will flock to Rocky just because nobody ever got fired because of a RHEL bug.<p>Thanks for coming to my TED rant.