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.
I looked at RHEL pricing but damn hell no.
The rest is even more outdated than Debian, so just use Debian.
In general stable Desktops are not enjoyable. You will basically not want to read Linux News anymore as you wont be getting any of that.
Its good for enterprises, where policies dont need to change etc. Also in combination with Flatpak and EPEL it may work somehow, but its just worse than using some normal Distro I heard.
@Pantherina
There is a free subscription for RHEL for individuals.And I think it’s less of an issue nowadays with old packages since we have extra layers such as podman containers over distrobox, flatpak, snap, Nix etc.
Then you can have a solid base OS with less solid layers on top where things are allowed to break but don’t mess with the rest of the system. I use Fedora Kinoite as my base for this exact reason.Interesting, didnt know that.
Snaps are only somewhat secure on Ubuntu, at least to my state of knowledge. Only on Ubuntu do they have the Apparmor profiles to isolate apps.
I think Fedora Atomic is just better for most cases. KDE got their stuff together mostly (I will not want to use a stable version until 6.3 or something) and the rest of Fedora never breaks for me.
CentOS is just RHEL without the support.
You’re more out of date than RHEL. Centos was killed off in 2020, stream is upstream.
RHEL with the free licence is RHEL without support.
Sort of, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. I started on OpenSUSE Leap but had issues getting things like GPU and Steam working. Red Hat was also a non-starter because of the lack of gaming functionality.
TW works great for gaming and the enterprise features I care about (like domain joining) work out of the box. Its certainly harder to set up than something more geared towards home use (typically one of the various the downstreams of Debian or Arch) but that doesn’t bother me.
Sort of
Not even close
Fedora Rawhide (?) == Opensuse TW
Fedora == Opensuse leap
RHEL == Suse enterprise
The higher ones are a testing ground for the one below, until you get to the actual product, the enterprise distros. They have completely different priorities
Red Hat was also a non-starter because of the lack of gaming functionality.
Unless you’re running bleeding edge hardware, you can install the drivers just fine. Enterprise users also need GPUs. Flatpak solves steam in most cases.
Opensuse Leap is built from SUSE Linux Enterprise and then additional packages added (those packages from Opensuse are also available to SUSE), it is not very comparable to Fedora and is more like Rocky Linux. SLE doesn’t have an upstream distribution in the same way Fedora is to RHEL.
It seems neither of us are correct. According to this, they’re both built from TW, but now leap can use those enterprise packages as well. I couldn’t find a more recent article. The main reasoning seems to be to allow opensuse users to test sel packages.
A Tumbleweed snapshot is very different than Fedora though. They are created automatically, sometimes daily, based on the activity in Factory and the result of automated testing, so any snapshot from there is essentially a snapshot of factory where the main development happens. Fedora has much more work before it is made a release.
Leap uses SUSE Enterprise binaries now, it’s part of the closing the gap they mentioned towards the end and it did end up implemented in SP3. The package hub is community packages from openSUSE. SUSE and openSUSE have a very different and much more collaborative process.
Isn’t the rawhide -> branched -> stable process similar?
Rawhide is also rolling with daily updates, it gets frozen before a release (branched) and tested, and then branched is released as stable.
TW is rolling, it gets frozen before a release and tested, and then that snapshot is released.
They’re both using OpenQA to run automated tests before releasing the snapshot for the day.
Leap uses SUSE Enterprise binaries now, it’s part of the closing the gap they mentioned towards the end and it did end up implemented in SP3.
Nice, that’s good to know.
The package hub is community packages from openSUSE. SUSE and openSUSE have a very different and much more collaborative process.
Yeah, I’m starting to get that. It looks really nice for both corporate and personal interests.
Thats an older post, Leap 15.2 i think it said, more recent releases are sharing same SLE binaries, and part of Leap installs is now suse repo for some stuff rather than all from opensuse repo
TIL about Fedora, last I knew it was a rolling bleeding edge OS. Clearly lots of movement in the Red Hat camp.
As for gaming, drivers were not the problem for me. Getting games to run with ease was. On OpenSUSE, I just install Steam, enable Proton and basically go at that point. Red Hat was non-trivial to do this. Could be a skill issue, but I had a better time getting going with OpenSUSE TW.
Fedora has been a thing since 2003, released alongside Red Hat Enterprise Linux after Red Hat Linux was discontinued. The gaming issues sound interesting, though. Did you have steam installed through rpmfusion, flatpak, or something else?
Sorry I meant TIL about it being considered stable, haha. I’ve known about Fedora because I used it when it was meant to replace the free Red Hat Linux.
As for Steam, I don’t recall how I installed it, sorry! I just recall significant grief getting it going (again, perhaps a skill issue) but had no big roadblocks using OpenSUSE.
@Shareni Not sure this comparison is correct
Fedora rather corresponds to OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or Debian Testing
Fedora Rawhide is very experimental, OpenSUSE once had a testing version, couldn’t find it now on the download page
Yeah, I learned more about their lifecycles due to this thread.
I think you’re correct as far as usability is concerned, but they’ve got a lot of similarities:
- both are released as daily snapshots, that were only auto tested
- those snapshots are frozen before an update and tested further
- then they’re released as a new minor/major version
The comparison really breaks with leap and sel. While fedora is directly upstream of rhel, both sel and leap are downstream from TW, and leap also has sel packages and so it’s also downstream from it. But I think my point still sort of stands because it seems like they mainly implemented that to get additional testing for sel packages.
Usability and stability wise, a better comparison would be: fedora:tw -> centos:leap -> rhel:sel
RHEL at work.
Not having
KateorOkularis a pain.
Need to downloadcmakefor certain cases.
Subscription Manager is a pain.Air gap means I can’t make do with
snaps.I would also gripe about not having KDE, but that would be unfair and off topic in this case.
@ulterno
For which cases did you need cake for example?My base OS is Fedora Kinoite and I’m considering have AlmaLinux in a podman container for some applications and tools. Replacing it every year because fedora is eol is too often in my opinion.
Hasn’t Kate been replaced by an upgraded Kwrite or is Kate still maintained?
For which cases did you need cake for example?
Since you asked, I don’t usually need cake, since I don’t do parties, but I might occasionally buy a piece and eat it.
Hasn’t Kate been replaced by an upgraded Kwrite or is Kate still maintained?
kateandkwriteare both maintained and usable side by side on the same system.
In terms of features…kwrite:kate::notepad:notepad++. Kinda…kwriteis still much more featurefull thannotepad.
They have KDE Frameworks dependencies, which makes it non-trivial to install on RHEL when you can only access the local base and EPEL repo.
Yeah, basically your DE will be the default of the distro. I’ve never had good luck with KDE above Centos 7. But I’m good with Gnome. I’m not saying it’s not possible, but it’s not worth my time and effort personally.
Rocky 9 as my daily driver on both desktop and laptop, yeah. Ever since starting my current job a couple years ago, where we use RHEL everywhere from servers to desktops I just started switching my entire homelab to Rocky.
Personally it’s perfectly fine. Not as flashy or glamorous as Pop OS (which is definitely a fun choice) but I like the stability. I need my computer to be secure and also just work so I can use it to do what I need or want to do.
Still have Steam, Discord, FF, Thunderbird, YTMDA, etc all running just fine on it, though I normally stream from my Windows PC when I’m using it for gaming.
As a sysadmin and developer, I prefer Linux as my daily to Windows (hey, this was a surprise to me, anyway), and from that list I prefer Rocky over others currently. Maybe one day that’ll change, but I don’t see me moving any time soon.
It doesn’t make any sense.
Why staying on old package for unnecessary stability (that stability is for highly “mission critical” things).
Nowadays with Flatpaks you can use any distros you want.
This is what I am using on Debian Stable
Distrobox on Debian Stable?
For a while, I have been thinking of trying Arch via Distrobox on Debian Stable. Feels like it would be the best of both worlds.
Yeah, I am running Debian Sid, OpenSuse TW, Gentoo and some Arch distrobox containers. It works so good! Highly recommend it
Have. I like btrfs, you only get that with Oracle and they have philosophical issues, but also random brokenness with things like selinux policies.
Old packages aren’t really an issue for me, but missing packages that haven’t been put into EPEL can be a pain. Depends what you want to accomplish or need.
I feel similarly about Fedora’s quick EOL, which was how I got onto an enterprise desktop distro too. The paper cuts are why I ended up switching to Mint.
You can use btrfs with any distro. It’s just easier to install on some than others. Ubuntu and Mint will automatically create subvolumes for root and home if you install on a btrfs partition. With Debian, you have to manually create and mount all of the subvolumes before starting the installation.
You can’t really use it with redhat. You can swap the kernel and install the user space tools, but then you won’t get support from redhat.
Is anyone here using RHEL support, and is also able to mess around with their partitions?
The free licences are unsupported, and I doubt people are dropping $300+ for RHEL every few for their personal desktop.
Except CentOS/RHEL. RH doesn’t build the kernels with btrfs support.
deleted by creator
It was available as a technology preview in RHEL 6 and 7, but dropped in 8. There apparently wasn’t much demand for it, and the reputation of BTRFS isn’t exactly synonymous with the image of reliability Red Hat strives for. There’s also the idea of maintenance and support burdens, and Red Hat themselves have launched their own stab at a fs with an integrated volume manager called Stratisd, though IBM supposedly absorbed the team that was working on it for their own products.
Just in time for Fedora to use it by default and create some interest. I get the maintenance burden though, RHEL patches their kernel like crazy. They still use XFS as default which I think is pretty unique at this point.
They don’t have any devs to support it. The one dev who an idea about btrfs left for Oracle, from what I’ve read.
Btrfs is rather nice in the correct scenarios, and lack of btrfs is one reason I’m moving away from CentOS servers.
I used Rocky 9 at home for a while. I think I had an emergency with a disk and had to install fedora because it’s all I had. I also use Rocky 8 workstations at work without any problem.
I could easily slip back to Rocky over Fedora no problem. But I don’t game or do anything except serve ipa.
Edit: and yes these were/are my daily driver desktops.
@zenharbinger @anders i have weird issues with almalinux on older (like intel v1) hardware which i didn’t with fedora/rocky/etc which makes me think some unredhats are doing their kernels differently
fwiw@zenharbinger
Okay cool. I don’t game so for me that’s not a problem neither if games don’t work.
I’ve done the other way around
@possiblylinux127
What do you mean with other way around?Pop OS, Debian and Linux Mint in production
@possiblylinux127
And then enterprise Linux on your home desktop?If you count Fedora and Proxmox then yes
@possiblylinux127 Fedora FTW 🙏
Rhel is fine. No reason not to try it, they’re letting you register sixteen systems for free.
I’m curious if it’s easy to use for this purpose or if the older packages are a pain.
I’m currently running MX + nix unstable. Debian’s not enterprise, but it’s close enough.
There are some things that are pretty hard to handle. For example large DEs like KDE, or Nvidia proprietary drivers. I wouldn’t even try to handle them through nix.
Besides that, you’ll also have to deal with the issues the other PM might have. For example flatpak and outdated system libraries (flatpak doesn’t provide them). Nix doesn’t have that issue because it provides everything, but it uses more disk space, and you have to deal with nix docs.
In the end it really depends on your needs, and only trying it out will tell you for sure. If you’re a gamer with the newest hardware, you’re probably not going to have fun. If you need it for work, it’ll be great if you can deal with an external PM. If you need it as a media device, slap on a few flatpaks and it’s perfect.
For me, this approach is far better than using a rolling distro, and I might try out RHEL at some point just out of curiosity. Unlike Arch, Debian will always boot, but I still have the newest docker instead of the one that was deprecated 3 months ago and won’t be updated for at least a year. Also, home-maanger makes it a breeze to make a list of packages and have them installed wherever and whenever.
Also, Centos is gone, stream is upstream so it’s a testing ground for RHEL instead of a RHEL repack. I wouldn’t go with the bootleg RHELs, that’s just asking for trouble if they haven’t switched to upstream as well.
Yeah. They used to be RHEL derivatives, but now they’re either upstream (Alma) or a mix of legally dubious sources and upstream (Rocky).
They can’t be as stable, and 16 free RHEL licences is more than enough for personal or small business use.
Even on servers, “stable” distros suck.
It’s less bad these days thanks to Docker but when Docker was even a few years old, guess which servers still had no support for it…
Fedora is probably the closest you can practically get.
It can be done, but I wouldn’t recommend it. Containers and VMs running a stable distro on top of something like Fedora, Tumbleweed, or whatever else is my preferred setup.
Something like Fedora also has a more mature in-place upgrade ability than the EL distros have.
Strange…
Usually you’d run the more stable distro on the bottom and the more cutting-edge on top, not the other way around.
The cutting edge distro will have better consumer hardware support, which matters in a laptop/desktop.
Containers and VMs running a stable distro on top of something like Fedora, Tumbleweed, or whatever else is my preferred setup.
Just why?
Something like Fedora also has a more mature in-place upgrade ability than the EL distros have.
RHEL gets a new version every 5 years, not every 6 months. It’s not really relevant since OP has 3 more years before maintenance support starts. By that time a full format is definitely in order.
Just why? RHEL gets a new version every 5 years.
You answered your own question. Maintaining software will eat up lots of time. It’s fine when there is a team to maintain software for installs, but not really something a single person running a desktop/laptop probably wants to deal with.
The 5yr release cycle is a pain starting about year 3 even for people who get paid to deal with it. 😆
VMs and containers on top of something more up to date is the best of both. Up to date distro with features, and all the distros one could want!
In-place upgrades are very relevant. Who wants to destroy their setup and reinstall everything when a new OS is released?
There is leapp for EL in-place upgrades, but it’s new and rather rough, from my testing.
Flatpak has made software support better, but I’d still recommend something else without a concrete reason, like proprietary CFD software or something which only supports EL.
Maintaining software will eat up lots of time.
But you have to do more maintenance the more your system is up to date. I’ve never had to fix a faulty grub update on a stable distro, but I did on arch.
The 5yr release cycle is a pain starting about year 3 even for people who get paid to deal with it.
It really depends on the user. Think of the vast majority of people who use their personal machine only to browse, play media, and occasionally edit text files or spreadsheets. Just having to press a button to update the system and a few flatpaks for a decade is pretty appealing.
I wouldn’t try it though…
VMs and containers on top of something more up to date is the best of both. Up to date distro with features, and all the distros one could want!
I’m currently on mx + nix unstable. It will always boot, and half of all of my installed packages are near the edge. That’s what I consider the best of both worlds. No need to take the VM penalty if you don’t need to.
Who wants to destroy their setup and reinstall everything when a new OS is released?
It’s good for cleanup, and I got used to it in on windows. Even when I did everything manually, the longest I’ve spent between full reinstalls was 2 years. I literally did it the other day because I was switching back to xfce from kde.
The biggest issue was reinstalling all of the packages I need, but with
home-managerI’ve made a list. A single command installs all of the packages on it, no matter the distro.Keep your dotfiles in a repo, for safety if nothing else. Then you can resurrect your setup pretty easily.
I did on arch.
Arch. There’s the problem. 😆
Fedora and Tumbleweed keep up with Arch while being easier to maintain. Fedora is a semi-rolling release, and Tumbleweed is rolling release. Both are much more stable than Arch is.
Arch is great for people who want to tinker with their desktop/laptop install. I do not, so I run Fedora.
It depends on the user.
Run Fedora or Tumbleweed. They will be continuously updated, and an install will last years.
It will always boot…
Your basis for comparison is Arch which is known to be highly unstable and a handful to maintain. 😆
For my work, I need different OSes and distros for testing. If someone needs a stable distro for something, a VM or container will work. There are ways around the needing a stable.
Also, containers aren’t a penalty.
It’s good for clean up, and I got used to it on Windows.
You can break the cycle. Just because some you suffered doesn’t mean others have to. 🙂
Everyone says they’re going to clean up their profiles, but no one does. 😆
Keep your dot files in a repo…
I have that because I run through so many test servers and temp installs.
Then there are Ansible playbooks to setup my systems.
Fedora and Tumbleweed keep up with Arch while being easier to maintain
They can only dream about keeping up, TW especially from what I’ve seen, and that just proves my point: arch is harder to maintain because it’s more up to date.
Also, I ran fedora for a few weeks after giving up on arch, it failed to boot multiple times after an update, and programs would randomly stop working after a reboot. I somehow had none of those issues on nobara.
Run Fedora or Tumbleweed. They will be continuously updated, and an install will last years.
It will break more often, and if you only use it to browse you’ll still get all the updates you need if you used a stable distro. The only thing you’re missing out on is testing the newest version of the DE. I’ve installed fedora for a friend like that, but I’m pretty sure it was a mistake even though they haven’t had any issues so far.
There are ways around the needing a stable.
I need stable because I want my machine always to work. There’s no going around that if you’re running rhel on top of fedora, if fedora craps out you’re not getting to rhel. Specific compatibility requirements are different story, and I agree with you on that.
Your basis for comparison is Arch which is known to be highly unstable and a handful to maintain. 😆
My basis is that I’ve been using linux for close to 20 years, and have tried every popular distro. In that time, only stable distros like debian never crashed or failed to boot.
Also, containers aren’t a penalty.
But you do take a performance penalty when using them…
You can break the cycle. Just because some you suffered doesn’t mean others have to. 🙂
I literally did it the other day, made a cup of coffee, and finished with both around the same time. The only thing I had to suffer through was waiting for files to transfer to and from an external drive. And I’ll survive that easily if it means I’ll avoid possible bugs and performance impacts.
Then there are Ansible playbooks to setup my systems.
Sweet, makes sense really
