Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

The rise and fall of CentOS

Filed under
Linux

When RedHat switched to a modified business model as part of their rebranding for RedHat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in 2002, I parted ways with using their distribution at home. Shortly afterwards, CentOS Linux became available as another RHEL-derived option. The glory days for CentOS were the spring of 2007. RHEL5 shipped on March 14th that year, and CentOS followed with their CentOS5 release less than a month later. With some older competition like White Box failing to ever deliver a RHEL5 based release, CentOS has been the distribution to beat ever since, if you want a free-as-in-beer Linux that's as similar as possible to RedHat's Enterprise product. That's made it easy for me set up CentOS systems whenever necessary at home, while also having RedHat's commercial product available to recommend too.

The ugly memories of watching White Box shrivel up and die after failing to deliver a RHEL5 distribution have been coming back lately. RHEL6 was released in November of 2010, tomorrow it will be exactly six months old. There is no sign of a CentOS6 yet.

rest here




More in Tux Machines

Mir 0.8 Works On Less ABI Breakage, Touchspots, Responsiveness

While Ubuntu 14.10 on the desktop isn't using Mir by default, Mir 0.8.0 is being prepared for release by Canonical and it has a number of interesting changes. Read more

Open source history, present day, and licensing

Looking at open source softwares particularly, this is a fact that is probably useful to you if you are thinking about business models, many people don't care about it anymore. We talk about FOSS, Free and Open Source Software, but if we really are strict there's a difference between free software and open source software. On the left, I have free software which most typically is GPL software. Software where the license insures freedom. It gives freedoms to you as a user, but it also requires that the freedoms are maintained. On the right-hand side, you have open source software which is open for all, but it also allows you to close it. So here we come back to the famous clause of the GPL license, the reciprocity requirement which says, "If I am open, you need to be open." So software that comes under the GPL license carries with it something that other people call a virus. I call it a blessing because I think it's great if all software becomes open. Read more

Mozilla Wants to Save the Open Web, but is it Too Late?

Again, I think this is absolutely correct. But what it fails to recognise is that one of the key ways of making the Web medium "less free and open" is the use of legally-protected DRM. DRM is the very antithesis of openness and of sharing. And yet, sadly, as I reported back in May, Mozilla has decided to back adding DRM to the Web, starting first with video (but it won't end there...) This means Mozilla's Firefox is itself is a vector of attack against openness and sharing, and undermines its own lofty goals in the Open Web Fellows programme. Read more

Open source is starting to make a dent in proprietary software fortunes

Open source has promised to unseat proprietary competitors for decades, but the cloud may make the threat real. Read more