Is there a reason to use RHEL with the developer subscription instead of CentOS or Fedora for (mostly) Java...

Is there a reason to use RHEL with the developer subscription instead of CentOS or Fedora for (mostly) Java, Rust and Python development? Which distribution would you suggest for a developer? Currently thinking of using one of the above, Debian, Gentoo or Slackware.

I am no stranger to Linux and I am not afraid of CLI.

>inb4 Arch
I have used Arch before and truth be told, I see no reason to use Arch whatsoever. I have no use for the bleeding-edge packages (I need only a few up-to-date packages and I can compile them myself). AUR is amateur-ish and packages are often outdated. Even if the core system is stable, packages break because of dependencies. I want a super stable, professionally maintained system and packages, not a distro for ricers, hobbyists and kids.

Other urls found in this thread:

softwarecollections.org/en/scls/rhscl/rh-eclipse46/
youtube.com/watch?v=SaPLtnAZ0es
li.nux.ro/repos.html
fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
elrepo.org/
wiki.centos.org/PatrickDGarvey/AdditionalResources/Repositories?highlight=(softwarecollections)
access.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-enterprise-linux
open.qa/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I feel like you shouldn't be on Sup Forums. You're overqualified and make too much sense.

I wish you the best.

Regards,

user

It's literally preference, choose a distribution that will do what you want and use it.

fedora is just the upstream of redhat, you use redhat when n you need enterprise support. In all honesty its the best distro ive used. debian based distros have always given me trouble.

this reminds me of Sup Forums before 2013, if you weren't there you missed out

I'd prefer a Redhat/RPM based distribution but Fedora gets two releases a year and needs to be upgraded once a year though. I don't want to do a fresh install that often and upgrading frightens me (thanks to Ubuntu, I guess). CentOS, on the other hand, might be a bit too outdated. Meanwhile Debian-based distributions have a more suitable release-cycle but come with their own problems.

updating with fedora is a lot easier than ubuntu. I know what you mean, when i updated xubuntu random stuff wouldnt work anymore. But based on what ive heard with fedora updates less goes wrong. You could just not update, though i dont see why.

On the same note, switching to fedora was one of the best decisions i ever made. Im surprised its less popular than ubuntu. pure debian i understand though because it has its uses, although ive only used workstation fedora, not the other versions

second post best post

I guess I'll be switching to Fedora shortly. The release of 26 is getting closer and closer though, if I want to keep my system stable should I wait for 26, go for alpha or go for 25 and upgrade later? Also, what exactly is the point of the spins? I'll be using MATE or Xfce4 but as far as I know, I can just install them with the netinstall, making the spins redundant.

all distros spins are for bulk systems. Imagine having to do a net install on 40 new computers or something like that. Plus its for the user who doesnt know what to do. Use 25 if you want or wait, i dont think it will make much difference

The only reason to bother with the RH developer license is if you're developing something for someone that's going to use it on RHEL. Like, actual RHEL, they need the official is-dotted-and-ts-crossed support contract version for whatever reason.

If that's not the case then CentOS is the exact same thing with a different sticker on the box. Go ahead and use it, its easier.

Even if I developed for RHEL, which I currently do not, wouldn't a tiny dual-boot partition or a virtual machine do the job?

Anyways, I was convinced to try Fedora above. I guess Fedora is a better choice for a development workstation than CentOS. I've done some research and everyone seem to suggest CentOS mostly for servers. Personally I wouldn't mind the outdated software and the insane stability. Sounds pretty comfy.

rhel gives access to some packages that centos doesn't. for example, eclipse
it's not a big deal though. I'll take rhel for the cooler logo

cant you just install eclipse?

Ah yes, anything for a prettier screenfetch and a larger e-penis.

I thought most distributions package Eclipse? Seems to be available in the Debian repository at least. Isn't Eclipse free, open-source software that can be freely distributed?

For those shitty languages you don't need RHEL

Well maybe for Java but still, get it if you have the money and you're not a pajeet

>shitty languages
That's like, your opinion man. I didn't come here for programming advice. The languages might eventually change and of course I want an operating system that supports as wide variety of languages as possible. Java is unfortunately the one I have to (currently) use the most.

Also, I do not necessarily need "the money" as RHEL is provided, free of charge, via the developer program. However, I'm currently leaning towards Fedora.

Wow he struck a nerve there didn't he

If you have some time to spare, unironically install Gentoo

Not really, I don't particularly enjoy Java or Python either. If it was up to me, I'd just develop the easy stuff with [spoiler]Lua :^)[/spoiler] and delve deeper into C/C++ or Haskell.

Anyways, I'm here to discuss about Linux, GNU/Linux, BSD or whatever, distributions.

I'd have the time for it in case I nail it with first try. I can't afford too much toying around and breaking things though. I'm also installing all the necessary development tools will take a while due to compile times.

I was going to create a thread to ask this but I guess I've found a good place to ask: anyone using CentOS daily on a desktop? Like says, the stability sounds comfy but I don't know about software availability. How are the repos?

Then by all means get it, i mean i dont ever know why you're making this thread, i thought you'd ask only if you'd felt like it was an investment

It is the most stable and secure OS on the planet I would say, and if you need more bleeding edge stuff you can always dual boot

Because I never see RHEL (despite being available for free) or CentOS used on desktops or for development and assumed there was a better choice. Then again, maybe I just hang out with plebs. People only use Arch here, Slackware on linuxquestions, Ubuntu on Reddit and Windows over at the University.

Well it kind of depends how serious is the with you do.

Ultimately you can dev on any OS but RHEL it's like the best when it comes to stability and security.If i was shitting money I would get it just for the security since it looks like more vulns are being discovered even for Linux

Work you do *

Bump for victory

Thanks mate.

The security won't matter for the work I (currently) do, most of my workmates run Windows and are complete hacks. Don't know how they've even gotten themselves hired.

I appreciate the stability though. I want a system that'll stay the same for years and allow me to switch languages, IDEs and other tools as much as I wish, with as little issues as possible. I guess Debian Stable, CentOS and RHEL are the best distributions for the job. Maybe even Fedora.

Someone give this individual(person) an answer. I am curious as well.

Thanks for the shout out mate, downloading the ISO now to have a poke around while I wait for an answer.

I run Gentoo on my home machines and do all my dev work on CentOS/RHEL. Since the two are binary-compatible, I can develop for both at the same time. When I work at home I ssh or VNC into the pther boxes as need be.

Looks like the board is clueless about CentOS/RHEL and only use their riced Archs through VMs to post screenfetches.

If the thread is still alive when you've given CentOS a shot, feel free to post about your first impressions.

wow your really rude you know that.

I'm sorry. I know it's a soft spot for you guys but I really want to keep the thread alive.

How difficult is the actual installation. Can I just leave the kernel to compile itself or will I need to intervene every now and then? Is the compilation time the reason why "installing Gentoo" has become a meme or is it the fact that Gentoo used to be difficult to install? Or is the meme justified because it is, in fact, difficult to install? How easy is it to screw things up?

I installed Arch as my second distribution after a week of using Ubuntu two(?) years ago. It was surprisingly easy and did not take long. Yet I am frightened by Gentoo's installation because I don't want to flush 6+ hours of my life down the drain.

softwarecollections.org/en/scls/rhscl/rh-eclipse46/

Damn, I can actually get RHEL license through University. I think I'll just linger with the master's thesis for a while :^)

t. OP

not him, but have you considered Calculate Linux? it's gentoo, but without the hassle, and you can install binary packages rather than compile from source.

Here is a nice review of CenOS 7

youtube.com/watch?v=SaPLtnAZ0es

I heard that RPMFusion has beta support for CentOS.

Fedora is much better for desktop but having to upgrade every 6 months is a pain in the ass, I hope they make a LTS version.

Sabayon seems to be a better option.

Since you do the compilation in the background, once the basic install is done it doesn't take that long, plus you can install binaries for big jobs like OOffice or VBox. I have one Gentoo box that is running over 5 years and it's as up to date as it can be (using ~x86_64 unstable). I run KDE on the desktop(s), and other than an occasional glitch everything works a treat.

Sabayon isn't as well supported tho. Calculate is actually trying to compete with RHEL and take on enterprise purposes. much more what OP is looking for imo

You use REHL when you need the technical support.

This

It's all just Linux. Same shit

If you start from the minimal install, you will need to know how to use systemd to start up gdm (the only display manager provided by the base repository) upon boot. Some drivers, although free for distribution, are not provided by the base repository (e.g. ath5k, needed to grab the package from ElRepo).
I have been installing and removing packages, CentOS hasn't freaked out in my 5 months of heavy bullying using the base repository alone. If you want to play videos using Totem, you will need to configure two repositories: EPEL and Nux-dextop. These two are enough to have satisfactory selection of software to choose from. The documentation of RHEL7 applies to CentOS7 also. Default GNOME interface uses gnome-classic extensions, also provided by the repository to ensure there are no conflicts. I don't know what else to cover here aside that I use it as my daily driver for email, shitposting machine and "study environment".
li.nux.ro/repos.html
fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL
elrepo.org/
wiki.centos.org/PatrickDGarvey/AdditionalResources/Repositories?highlight=(softwarecollections)
access.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-enterprise-linux

Both me.

Exactly. I tried Calculate once long ago and managed to break it with a magical CLI-command. Until I broke it, it was working wonders. Sabayon seems more unprofessional, like Mint to Debian and Manjaro to Arch. I am quite confident I could just install Gentoo during a day off or something though.

I know, I'm overthinking, can't help myself.

so you do need tech support? just go then with what seems most obvious and settle with your RHEL.

That was two years ago. I was new to Linux. I'm way more experienced now and able to figure everything out with online sources.

Besides, I wouldn't break RHEL or Debian based system like I broke Calculate.

so use RHEL then nigga damn

Sure but telling me to go RHEL for the support because I broke a Gentoo-based distribution two years ago might be exagerration.

Anyways, I need to wait until tomorrow to get the RHEL subscription so I can shitpost all day.

i thought you were implying you do based on the first post you quoted in
to i took it as you meaning "Both me" as in you tech support. anyway, not like it's a bad thing.

What's the difference between RHEL and fedora?

What is the problem with debian? I've been using debian stable for about 6 years now and never had a problem, really impressed with how stable it is.
Sometimes packages are outdated but more often than not that can be solved by using backports. Sometimes I do need to compile from source however, and I don't like the work it takes to keep manually compiled packages up to date.
I used testing for a while and it worked ok but went back to stable for no reason really. Now I'm going for unstable as I think it will be stable enough and avoid most of the work in occasionally compiling from source.
If you rather have something more up-to-date than stable but don't want rolling release I'd say to just use ubuntu.

I never used Fedora, what would the benefits be? The main reason I'm not so interested in it is because it is "less standard" than debian and its derivatives and I don't really know how could Fedora be better. RPM seems like a pain when most stuff is avaliable on DEB.
Also I've been using debian for so long I doubt the effort to switch would be worth it.

I've been thinking about using Gentoo because of its 'do it yourself' philosophy, it is quite close to fetching all the sources from upstream and doing everything yourself. It may pay off once you are used to it and if you have to maintain a small number of machines, but atm I don't feel like wasting so much time on it. Debian is very carefully packaged and everything works so well I don't really see any practical benefits, mostly the satisfaction of knowing every last possible detail about my system.

He's asking for your opinion. Do YOU think it's worth it?

I'd just use Fedora or Debian. Maintaining a subscription is a waste of time and effort, and RHEL does nothing another distribution can't.

For some cases, Fedora is "more standard" than Debian, thanks to RHEL.

RHEL is way more stable and as a result not quite as "bleeding edge" as Fedora. RHEL is aimed for enterprises while Fedora is aimed for desktops. Fedora is used as a "testbed" for RHEL.

The point of RHEL is that you get access to their knowledge base which is really nice. I'm almost 80% sure the free developer subscription gives you the access too.

Debian is taking everything Red Hat is pushing on them (e.g. systemd), taking away whatever uniqueness there is to it. No reason to use any distribution that is not Fedora, CentOS or RHEL in that case.

One thing to cosider is the target you're developing for. The stuff I work on runs on RHEL/CentOS platforms - real-time weather satellite acquisition and display. Devel has to be done on the target OS.

Doesn't sound like you'd benefit much from Fedora if you're happy with Debian and switching to testing. The thing that pisses me off about Fedora is the regularity of releases, I really do not want to be upgrading that often. Thinking of switching back to Debian, I'm currently trying out Arch after having it on my to do list for like two years. It's okay. The AUR is all right but I nervously read every PKGBUILD like a fussy mother; I'd feel better compiling manually but keeping compiled stuff up to date manually is a ball ache too.

I dunno. Maybe I really want Gentoo but just the thought of installing it is making me tired. I'm too old.

No reason whatsoever. Just go fedora

Then I'd just say if he's willing to pay for the license then sure. But if fedora does what he needs then there is no point.

Why does everyone suggest RHEL if the license cost is not an issue but in case it is, everyone suggests Fedora.

Shouldn't Fedora be suggested if one needs newer packages than RHEL but if one is looking for a RHEL replacement, CentOS should be the obvious choice, no?

This.

>Shouldn't Fedora be suggested
Fedora suffers the same issue as every other rolling release distro: it breaks at random times. CentOS and RHEL does not seem to have this problem.

>Fedora is a better choice for a development workstation
no is not

If the thing bothering you about Fedora is how often it updates, why the hesitation in going back to Debian?
I'm curious about which problems you encountered to make you search for other distros when Debian seems to fit the bill perfectly...
Arch seems way too 'amateur' for me. It is a perfectly good distro, but if you want stability and don't feel like messing around too much, not for you...
I'd say the other option would be Gentoo and do everything yourself but as you said, way too much work..

That was not my personal opinion, it was a conclusion made by googling and reading people's responses. It's surprising how little people defend or recommend CentOS. Everyone says it's a distro for servers and Fedora should be used instead.

Anyways, I was leaning towards Fedora after the first few comments but I'm starting to lean towards RHEL or CentOS now. The stability just seems so damn comfy.

The Apple MacBook Pro with Retina Display doesn't have this problem.

What problem, exactly? Choice?

Fedora is not rolling, though. It's a regular release and the fact that it's broken as fuck all the time just shows you how much the maintainers care.

On the other hand, openSUSE Tumbleweed is rolling and stable as fuck because they have a robust testing infrastructure and are not complete muppets.

Give me 1 reason for not using Debian instead of CentOS or RHEL, and is not license related.

You work on a product that runs on a base system other than Debian-

Like what and how often this happens? Is the package manager of either have anything to do?

RHEL is insanely popular amongst enterprises and if you're developing for an enterprise which uses RHEL you better develop with RHEL.

Also, using a Redhat product is better for learning the Redhat environment. Might help you land a job some day.

We build integrated systems of hardware and software with in-house developed drivers. It's not practical to support multiple distros out of the box, and customers don't want the problems related to it. We provide customer support remotely around the world, so consistency is important as well as stability.

Debian has a culture of patching the shit out of everything. That introduces subtle bugs and inconsistencies, sometimes even huge security vulnerabilities (last time it was OpenSSL if I recall correctly).
On the other hand, they sometimes don't patch things that are really dangerous like that time when Chromium automatically downloaded a proprietary binary, or when it was revealed systemd-resolved has a hardcoded fail"safe" of using 8.8.8.8 if all configured DNS servers fail.
Finally, for a supposedly democratic community they are really susceptible to hostile takeovers like when they dropped ffmpeg in favour of libav (because the maintainers were aligned with libav) and staged a little diversion when they introduced a placeholder for the ffmpeg binary that said ffmpeg is deprecated. Ironically enough, libav is now dead and Debian is crawling back to ffmpeg like a bitch.

>just shows you how much the maintainers care.
In that regard, it is no different from other distributions that are "regular release" or whatever you name it, though.
>On the other hand, openSUSE Tumbleweed is rolling and stable as fuck
This sound a lot like the Arch user discourse, I am skeptical.

This is the answer I was looking for, thanks.

>This sound a lot like the Arch user discourse, I am skeptical.
open.qa/

to add some political reasons to your list the creator went insane, broke into a house, claimed police brutality then killed himself.

Opensuse basically got rid of all stable release versions (and made a confusing mess out of their versioning) but tumbleweed isn't even the latest builds on their versioning. It's like.... rolling but not always bleeding edge.

I don't use tumbleweed I'm on 42.2 (latest non-beta non-rolling), I have nvidia cards and weekly kernel updates inevitably cause hell with my drivers. OBS is too good though, like an AUR with its own build system that auto-handles ppa generation.

Actually I kind of like their patches. Linux in general is a collection of various projects which sometimes have slight differences between them and Debian developers try to finx some of those discrepancies, which IMO makes for a more consistent and easier to manage system.
Of course they sometimes fuck up stuff (the OpenSSL fiasco was just terrible) but mostly it ensures a consistent system.
I don't really care for their internal struggles as long as they manage to keep the system as a whole working well, for example I never really did notice the ffmepg to libav transition since both packages were available to install and you could just choose either one without bigger problems.

That being said, I do think it is better to avoid their patching if you intend to manage things yourself, which is what Gentoo does for example.

>duuh Arch sucks because.
>I'm a java dev I need a rock solid system.
>I'm sorrounded by plebs.
>How do I install gentoo? Plz I'm terrified.

Go back to ubuntu or, even better, just hop on the windows boat like your coworkers, and then the fuck outta here.

CentOS is the same shit, just manage it yourself

I don't need a rock solid system because I am a Java developer, I just prefer a stable system I can use until my next build. Having a wide variety of development software easily available is also a huge plus. I am sure Arch would be fine for the job but I personally don't like AUR or rolling-release distributions.

And yes, Gentoo installation is frightening because of its time consuming nature. I rather not waste six+ hours for nothing.

Try reading the whole thread first, or are you just a dick by nature?

>this reminds me of Sup Forums before 2013, if you weren't there you missed out
I remeber this place before Reddit-retards, Pajeets Smartphone (le low-rupee snepdragon xDDD), and Sup Forums Reddit gamers took over.

Feels bad man. Fuck you Sup Forums.

To be fair, I was kind of a dick towards Arch in the OP for the extra (you)s, I'm surprised it took 80 posts to actually trigger someone.

You get complacent reaading a thread with a low shitpost ratio...

If you need enterprise support use redhat otherwise use gentoo or fedora

> I rather not waste six+ hours for nothing.

Okay, polite answer:
You're not wasting, you're learning. You're wasting time here instead of reading the gentoo documentation. If you think that you waste time fucking up the first time sorry but all I can tell you is to use ubuntu or windows.

If you want gentoo, learn it, install it and use it. It's not something you will regret even if you kernel panic the first time.

If you don't care about gentoo just use debian stable or RHEL since you have it free.

On a side note you can use Arch fucking off the AUR and compiling what you need from source or installing binaries or w/e you want.

How I see GNU/Linux: choose a distro with a package manager and repos you like, learn it and build it the fuck you want.

Not wasting time here, answering and reading the replies take minutes at maximum.

I've actually read a ton of Gentoo documentation for fun (yes, that is how I spend my leisure time) and the installation process doesn't seem that difficult, just time consuming. I'll probably give it a try when I have the time and if I end up liking it, I've found myself a bistro. If I don't like it, well there's always Debian, Fedora and RHEL/CentOS.

>ubuntu or windows
Windows is honestly out of question, I still keep a small Windows partition for Visual Studio and WPF but I absolutely hate my life every time I boot into Windows. Don't see any reason to return to Ubuntu either as long as Debian exists.

Red Hat isn't for individuals. It only really make sense if you manage a bunch of desktops on a domain, yada yada yada.

How is the famous support of RHEL I mean what support you get from them

I personally prefer debian for development since it's light, stable, and apt/.deb for packages seems more well supported. That being said CentOS is also really good for being stable and light, a bit more up to date, and I know some larger companies give preference to yum/.rpx package ecosystem.

anyone actually use rhel workstation edition?

>if I end up liking it, I've found myself a bistro. If I don't like it, well there's always Debian, Fedora and RHEL/CentOS.
Just run all these in a kvm/xen instance. Their all GOOD distributions. Also don't listen to these niggers talking about gentoo taking hours to compile. Only dickheads that compile a whole desktop watching the fucking terminal update.