June 30th, 2024, will bring the End of Life (EOL) of CentOS Linux (2023)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

CentOS Linux is reaching end of life, forcing organizations that relied on its RHEL-compatible, free, long-term support model to choose new platforms such as RHEL, AlmaLinux, Rocky Linux, Debian, Ubuntu, or commercial offerings like SUSE and Oracle Linux. Commenters debate migration strategies, the merits and sustainability of different RHEL-compatible clones, and whether to leave the Red Hat ecosystem entirely, especially after the abrupt truncation of CentOS 8’s support window and Red Hat’s tighter control over RHEL source access. Many see this as a watershed moment for enterprise Linux, shifting vendor support patterns and accelerating moves toward Debian/Ubuntu or container-focused and immutable server setups.

Impact of CentOS EOL and Migration Status

  • CentOS 7 EOL (and earlier CentOS 8 EOL) is forcing migrations; some orgs finished in 2023, others still run CentOS 6/7, sometimes on “mysterious” legacy machines.
  • For laggards, EOL is a serious compliance and security issue; some consider third‑party extended support (e.g., TuxCare) as a stopgap.
  • In‑place upgrade tools (Leapp/ELevate) are used but reported success is mixed (e.g., ~30% success in one test, hours of downtime), so many favor greenfield rebuilds.

Successor Options and Tradeoffs

  • RHEL remains the “official” enterprise choice; some use free developer licenses or UBI images, but many resent cost and licensing complexity.
  • CentOS Stream is defended as ABI‑compatible and relatively close to RHEL, but others reject it as “RHEL beta,” unsuitable when strict stability or vendor certification is required.
  • Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux are the main community RHEL‑like successors:
    • Rocky aims for bug‑for‑bug compatibility with RHEL, using cloud/OCI sources; praised for fidelity, criticized as relying on fragile “loopholes.”
    • AlmaLinux now targets ABI compatibility using CentOS Stream sources; seen by some as more sustainable and more aligned with Red Hat’s stated model.
  • Other options mentioned: Oracle Linux, SUSE Liberty Linux, OpenELA, CoreOS/Flatcar/Talos for Kubernetes, and non‑EL options like Debian or Ubuntu Server.

Licensing, Source Access, and GPL Debate

  • Heavy debate over Red Hat restricting convenient RHEL source access:
    • One side calls it “effectively closed source” and a GPL/EULA conflict.
    • Another argues all component sources remain available via CentOS Stream; rebuilding RHEL is harder but still possible.
  • Disagreement over whether downstream clones should comply with Red Hat’s CentOS Stream‑first vision or aggressively replicate RHEL “for free.”

Ecosystem and Vendor Support Shifts

  • Some commercial software vendors are dropping CentOS/Stream or lagging on RHEL 9, adding Ubuntu and sometimes SLES instead.
  • Many orgs respond by standardizing on Debian/Ubuntu, citing similar stability, better hardware support, and distrust of Red Hat/IBM.

Sentiment Around Red Hat/IBM and CentOS 8 “Rug‑Pull”

  • Strong resentment over CentOS 8’s abruptly shortened lifecycle versus earlier expectations of ~10 years.
  • Some view it as a short‑term profit grab that destroyed long‑built goodwill and accelerated mass migration away from the RHEL ecosystem.