Enterprise Linux on desktop?
Anyone using enterprise Linux on their desktop such as RHEL, Alma, Rocky, CentOS etc.?
I’m curious if it’s easy to use for this purpose or if the older packages are a pain.
Enterprise Linux on desktop?
Anyone using enterprise Linux on their desktop such as RHEL, Alma, Rocky, CentOS etc.?
I’m curious if it’s easy to use for this purpose or if the older packages are a pain.
It’s not trolling. There’s a very legitimate reason to use a distro with new packages and that is hardware compatibility - especially if you’re on a recent laptop, and you want all features working such as WiFi, flawless suspend and resume without battery drain or crashes, working Fn keys, or you want to make use of all the power management features in your processor (eg see all the recent AMD p-state driver advancements).
Newer packages (specifically: the kernel and mesa/vulkan stack) are also important for those who are gamers, as several performance improvements, bug fixes and compatibility fixes are made with each new release. For instance, just take a look at these performance benefits of the new ntsync driver:
Finally, even productivity users who don’t care about gaming can benefit from recent system packages - consider all the recent improvements in filesystem drivers such as btrfs and ntfs3, and the addition of the new bcachefs driver with kernel 6.7 which is a godsend for anyone running a tiered storage setup.
Also, the entire Linux community has been buzzing with the release of KDE 6 - just take a look at all the new features and improvements - such as much better Wayland support with tons of bug fixes, HDR, ICC profiles for individual monitors, color blindless correction filters for making the desktop experience better for people with protanopia/deuteranopia/tritanopia… there are some very legitimate improvements and use-cases here. How can you just wave all this off as trolling?!
So just because a distro with old packages suits your needs, doesn’t mean that everyone else is trolling. There are legit good reasons why many home users prefer leading-edge distros like Fedora, Arch, Tumbleweed etc.
cc: @anders@rytter.me
Hi! I sincerely want to thank you for your well thought out response. I apologize if the word troll came off wrong. I probably should have used a better descriptor. My primary goal was to be a voice FOR enterprise distros at home - because I saw mostly posts from people who probably aren’t professional sysadmins and have never even tried an enterprise distro.
I fully concede on the VERY new hardware being a challenge for RHEL, an Ubuntu LTS or similar. I’m unfortunately not in a situation where I can afford that problem (kids and daycare costs) so it’s fallen off my radar. I do occasionally run into it at work with research groups that just buy the latest/fastest gaming hardware without checking with IT (we would generally steer them towards workstation/data center grade hardware instead of gaming hardware…not applicable to this discussion for home use). If somehow I could acquire something with new enough hardware to have that problem I’d probably use Fedora on it (so I could just modify my Ansible to work with both), and wait for current Fedora to become RHEL and then that hardware would become RHEL for the rest of it’s lifetime. Mainly - the huge number of constant updates and the every 6 month big updates on Fedora are just too much hassle for me.
On gaming and the other comparisons about improvements on newer packages: I do agree with you. My personal approach has just moved to use what is “tried and tested” and “good enough”. It’s a pretty common approach for sysadmins to let other early adopters find all of the bugs in new stuff. For example: I’m excited about bcachefs, but when I installed Fedora Rawhide just to test it after the recent 6.7 release - I found it largely NOT ready for anything I would need to trust (commands that return the console, but no indication that they did nothing for example - doesn’t give me a good feeling about putting all of my family photos on it until it matures). For now, I’ll still use XFS for small systems and ZFS for large systems or where I need send/receive.
All of that said: I acknowledge these are preferences and my approach, not a " right" way. I do still think it’s a valid approach for some who wants less updates and a more stable config if they’re happy with “fast enough” and less potential for update breakage.
Thank you again for being respectful and detailed in your response. Cheers!