• Dehydrated@lemmy.world
      453·
      10 months ago

      No, they only fucked CentOS, and they made RHEL proprietary last year. Since Ubuntu’s decline, Fedora basically took it’s place. It’s very stable but not extremely outdated, has great security, always supports the newest technologies like Flatpak, Wayland, Pipewire, etc., has good Desktop spins and constantly innovates. The next Fedora KDE release will even completely drop support for X11, which is a good step because it forces developers to adopt Wayland. They also have pretty good immutable spins like Silverblue, Kinoite and others. Other cool distros like Nobara and uBlue are also built on top of Fedora.

      • Pantherina@feddit.deOP
        175·
        10 months ago

        Its not really proprietary. Developers get the code, and everyone that gets the binaries also gets the code. Thats GPL compliant.

        • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
          183·
          10 months ago

          To quote Software Freedom Conservancy:

          For approximately twenty years, Red Hat (now a fully owned subsidiary of IBM) has experimented with building a business model for operating system deployment and distribution that looks, feels, and acts like a proprietary one, but nonetheless complies with the GPL and other standard copyleft terms.

          • LeFantome@programming.dev
            71·
            10 months ago

            To quote both of you “nevertheless complies with the GPL and other standard copyleft terms”.

            Were you trying to prove his point?

            • med@sh.itjust.works
              5·
              10 months ago

              As shocking as this might be, I think he’s agreeing, and offering supplimentary proof

            • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
              1·
              10 months ago

              Obviously they comply with the GPL, otherwise they would get sued. But Red Hat acts exactly like a proprietary software company. That’s what the quote is trying to say.

        • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
          71·
          10 months ago

          I know that it’s a joke, but find me a distro that doesn’t include any proprietary blobs.

          • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
            61·
            10 months ago

            I think there are a few GNU extremist distros that don’t package drivers with blobs. They don’t even boot on some CPUs if your motherboard hasn’t had the necessary microcode patches, lots of hardware simply doesn’t work (WiFi, Bluetooth, sound, sometimes even ethernet), but they’re fully open.

            I have no idea how Linux-Libre is doing. I think Guix also had a Linux distro that refuses blobs by default. Most reviews end with “the WiFi doesn’t work but it was nice experiment”, it seems.

          • Hapbt@mastodon.social
            62·
            10 months ago

            @Dehydrated this is my pet peeve everytime i try to discuss anything about linux someone interrupts me about how SOME COMPONENT is proprietary
            like yeah, the keyboard on the laptop is proprietary, so are all the ICs, come on…

            • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
              8·
              10 months ago

              All the hardware is proprietary. The CPU, the ME in the CPU, the chipset on the mainboard, the BIOS, the RAM and SSD controllers, the TPM and everything else. Even the damn battery controller hardware and software are proprietary. It really doesn’t matter though.

              • Pantherina@feddit.deOP
                43·
                10 months ago

                I mean we have a monolithic kernel, with every single line of code running as root, that contains proprietary garbage. Thats even worse than Windows if you ask me, where you can see the drivers processes, which means they are seperate processes.

                I will soon compile my own kernel, because I dont really feel good with running such a bloated piece of bad code on my standard intel laptop.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      24·
      10 months ago

      There used to be a Linux just called Red Hat Linux. It was run by Red Hat obviously but a community built up around it.

      Fedora was literally created by RedHat and staffed to be the “community” distro. They did this so that they could be “corporate” with Red Hat Linux ( now called Red Hat Enterprise Linux ).

      I find it funny when people say that Red Hat is going to try to take away the community in Fedora and use their corporate behaviour in RHEL as an example. They literally created them both. The whole point of Fedora is to be community driven.

      Fedora is a lot like RHEL in most ways but absolutely not a competitor to it. More of a testing ground. This is all by design.

      Where things went wrong for them is that somebody created a bug for bug clone of RHEL. The story was that the clone would be a “community” but that is bonkers because ( by definition ) the clone cannot deviate from RHEL. It cannot innovate. It cannot modify or contribute code ( not even fix bugs ). So, it was just a zero cost version of RHEL. The whole reason for creating Fedora was to prevent that.

      Anyway, Red Hat likes Fedora and WANTS it to be “free” and anybody that understands the history knows why.

      In fact, the problem is somewhat that Fedora is not allowed to get too corporate. You will notice that Fedora is one of the staunchest distros with regards to including potentially patented codecs and such for example.