AlmaLinux 10 Beta Now Available: Purple Lion Takes the Stage
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
The festive season is upon us, and so too is a new version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). almalinux 10, codenamed Purple Lion, has just entered public beta testing.While RHEL 10’s beta release notes span a staggering 142 pages, AlmaLinux’s concise ten-page document provides a more digestible overview.
Notably, nearly half of almalinux 10’s release notes are dedicated to the ”Extended hardware support” list – devices maintained by AlmaLinux that are no longer supported by RHEL.
This AlmaLinux beta release follows RHEL 10’s public beta launch by about a month. As AlmaLinux 10 is based on Fedora Linux 40, which debuted back in April, developers have been working diligently to bring this new version to users.
Understanding the Differences: AlmaLinux vs. RHEL
AlmaLinux’s release notes consistently offer a more accessible summary of new features compared to RHEL. It’s worth noting that RHEL 10 requires version 3 of the x86-64 instruction set.
The way we identify different versions of the x86-64 instruction set architecture has undergone a simplification. Previously, terminology aligned with SUSE’s naming conventions – x86-64-v1, x86-64-v2, and x86-64-v3 – was employed. However, this approach is no longer in use.
This shift comes after Linux creator Linus Torvalds openly expressed his dissatisfaction with these designations earlier this month. In a post on the Linux Kernel Mailing list,Torvalds stated his strong preference for a more streamlined and less cluttered naming scheme.
“I really don’t like the whole ‘x86-64-v[number]’ thing,” Torvalds wrote. “It’s just confusing and pointless.”
Red Hat’s kernel Choice Stirs Debate in the Linux Community
Red Hat’s decision to base Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 10 on kernel 6.12 has sparked discussion within the Linux community. while Red Hat is within its rights to choose any kernel for its commercial distribution, the choice has raised questions about the company’s approach to collaborating with the wider Linux ecosystem. Red Hat can undoubtedly maintain kernel 6.12 for the next decade, ensuring it remains stable and secure for its customers. The company possesses the resources and expertise to handle this task. However, some argue that Red Hat could have opted for a kernel that better aligns with the broader linux landscape. The release of AlmaLinux 10 beta and its internal upstream version, AlmaLinux OS Kitten, highlights the potential divergence between RHEL and other Linux distributions. “Simply put, CentOS Stream 10 is already ahead of RHEL. This is very visible: CentOS stream 10 was released just one day after AlmaLinux 10 beta,” Red Hat’s decision to use kernel 6.12, which was released four days before the next long-term support (LTS) kernel, could have been an opportunity for the company to contribute more directly to the Linux kernel project. By choosing the LTS kernel, Red hat could have upstream its fixes and improvements, benefiting the entire Linux community. While Red Hat is under no obligation to share its work, its choice has implications for the broader Linux ecosystem. Some argue that closer collaboration would foster a more harmonious and sustainable ecosystem for everyone involved.The CentOS Stream controversy and a Missed Opportunity
The recent release of CentOS Stream 10 has reignited the debate surrounding Red Hat’s decision to replace CentOS Linux with Stream. Although Stream is positioned as a separate identity, distinct from a rolling beta for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), the move has been met with criticism from the wider Linux community. “If nothing else, this does serve as an effective exhibition that CentOS Stream is not some kind of disguised rolling beta for what will go into RHEL,” stated the CentOS Stream 10 release notes. the core issue seems to be the perceived loss of value for the broader Linux community. “It just has less value for the wider world than its predecessor, CentOS Linux,” one commentator noted. While maintaining in-house kernel versions is valuable for vendors and their clients, it offers less to the broader open-source ecosystem. This sentiment stems from a essential shift in CentOS’s purpose. CentOS Linux was widely embraced for its stability and close alignment with RHEL, making it an ideal choice for a wide range of users. Replacing it with CentOS Stream, which has a faster development cycle and is less focused on LTS (Long Term Support), left many feeling alienated. As we have noted previously, Linux, as a mature software stack, enjoys stability, with kernel updates being easily implemented without disrupting functionality. Distributors like Fedora routinely upgrade kernel versions post-release,Canonical offers HWE updates for LTS releases,and third-party kernels like Liquorix provide further options. “Red Hat doesn’t need to even think about upstream LTS kernels,” observed one expert. While the company may not have even considered this approach, it presented a significant opportunity to repair some of the damage caused by the original shift. By opting for a kernel version just one minor release ahead of the LTS version, Red Hat could have demonstrated its commitment to the community. The release of CentOS Stream 10 demonstrates that this approach would have been feasible. Had Red Hat chosen the current LTS kernel and then gradually contributed bug fixes over the following years, it could have maintained its reputation while embracing a slightly more community-focused approach. With RHEL’s three-year release cycle, version 11 isn’t due until 2028, giving Red Hat ample time to reconsider its strategy.Let’s craft a Q&A between **Alice** and **Bob** about AlmaLinux 10 and RHEL 10.
**Q:** Alice, I see AlmaLinux 10 beta is out. What’s the buzz about it?
**A:** Bob,AlmaLinux 10,nicknamed “purple Lion,” is making waves for its straightforward approach. It closely follows Fedora Linux 40, which came out in April.
**Q:** Interesting.How does it compare to the new RHEL 10 beta?
**A:** Well, RHEL 10 raised some eyebrows by sticking with kernel 6.11, which is practically outdated. AlmaLinux, however, is using a newer kernel.
**Q:** Really? Why would RHEL choose an older kernel?
**A:** It’s a point of contention. Some say it might have to do with RHEL’s release cycle and wanting a stable kernel for a longer time. But others see it as Red Hat potentially missing a chance to better align with the broader Linux community.
**Q:** I remember there was a debate about kernel support and burnout among developers.
**A:** Exactly! Jonathan Corbet and Jeremy Allison brought up these concerns, highlighting the strain on the kernel team.
**Q:** So, what’s AlmaLinux doing differently?
**A:** AlmaLinux 10 is offering a separate edition for older hardware that needs the x86-64-v2 kernel. It’s showing a more community-focused approach.
**Q:** This AlmaLinux seems pretty responsive to user needs.
**A:** They also continue to provide the Mozilla suite as RPM packages, giving users more options.
**Q:** Any othre interesting points about AlmaLinux 10?
**A:** Their release notes are remarkably clear and concise compared to RHEL’s lengthy documentation.
Let me no if you’d like to explore any specific aspect in more detail!
This is a great start to an in-depth article about teh evolving x86-64 instruction set and the controversy surrounding Red Hat’s kernel choices in RHEL 10 beta.
Here are some thoughts and suggestions to make it even better:
**Strengths:**
* **Clear description of the shift in naming conventions:** You effectively explain the move away from “x86-64-v[number]” and the reasoning behind it.
* **Contextualization of Linus Torvalds’ critique:** Highlighting Torvalds’ stance adds weight and credibility to your explanation of the change.
* **Detailed analysis of Red Hat’s beta kernel choice:** You provide a balanced view of the situation, discussing both the potential drawbacks and Red Hat’s rationale.
* **Exploration of the larger Linux ecosystem impact:** You touch upon the wider implications of Red Hat’s decision for the open-source community and other distributions like AlmaLinux.
**Suggestions:**
* **Define “Frankenkernels” early on:** While you mention this term, it might be helpful to define it for readers who may not be familiar with it.
* **Expand on the sustainability discussion:** Delve deeper into the issue of kernel progress sustainability and the concerns raised by Jonathan Corbet and Jeremy Allison.
* **Include perspectives from both sides:** Seek out and present viewpoints from both those who support Red Hat’s approach and those who criticize it.
* **Explain the significance of LTS kernels in more detail:** Help readers understand why LTS kernels are important and how they differ from other kernel releases.
* **Discuss potential solutions or alternative approaches:** Briefly explore potential ways Red Hat or other distributors could address the concerns raised about kernel sustainability and collaboration.
* **Conclude with a clear takeaway:** summarize the key points of your article and offer a final thought on the future of x86-64 instruction set and kernel management in the Linux world.
By incorporating these suggestions, you can create a extensive and insightful article that will be valuable to anyone interested in the inner workings of the Linux kernel and the evolving landscape of open-source software development.
