I am responsible for virtualization and networking, and other services related to the systems including Linux and Windows, but the security part is actually the responsibility of the French team in our headquarter.

Currently, I am dealing with Linux systems. We were on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and because of the license system, we have changed to use Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux.

Rocky Linux is suitable for our needs. We haven't specialized applications, just managing our network. Here we construct a model of infrastructure independent which must respond to the needs of our client, and we make tests. These are tests for VBS and some electronics that are made and developed here. It's an experimental infrastructure with many dynamic changes and many needs from our project manager. With our team, we can provide support as needed. We have a very good team with high skills in Linux and development, and it works correctly with no enterprise cost or enterprise license. At the same time, we have to conform to ISO 27001. We try to have the latest patch management, and we try to use some open source centralized platforms to manage or supervise what we have.

We are using Rocky Linux on servers including Cisco UCS M5, M4, and we have some Dells 750, 740, with high-performance computing tasks. We have stronger servers.

Rocky Linux is quite good for us and for the nature of our business. By using Foreman, Katello, for example, the management system and repository for patch management is very quiet and very good for our business because we don't need more.

Until now, we haven't had any problems with integration of Rocky Linux with other products in my system.

We haven't needed technical support for Rocky Linux, but I think because of the complexity and the number of VMs that we have, we can consider going for a support contract. It's not a bad idea because, while we haven't encountered very difficult problems, with the complexity of the network infrastructure, we need to be supported by the editor.

If I find something which is strong with virtualization with Rocky Linux, it's an alternative that I can study and spend time learning about, trying it, making tests, validating, and perhaps ultimately migrating.

We haven't implemented Rocky Linux container management yet, but we have an idea to find an alternative solution to VMware because of the license model. To migrate to a solution, we need to improve our skills for the first step, and for the second step, we must be able to support the developer teams. What I'm sure about is that we are looking for a solution for virtualization in order to migrate our VMware platform.

One year ago, we switched to version 9.4, Alma and Rocky Linux, and now we are on 9.5.

I cannot answer how Rocky Linux frequent updates have aided our organization in staying secure because it's not under my responsibility, but what I am sure about is that in the next three years, we will continue to use Linux.

I cannot judge if Rocky Linux is complex to use for the first time or if it is intuitive because we use very simple applications such as DHCP, DNS, ICS. I don't remember encountering any difficulties because the infrastructure is for tests and is not an enterprise infrastructure. We haven't deployed LDAP or Active Directory. We don't have this kind of complexity or mail servers. For storage, we are using the Dell EMC storage device hardware, Unity. We don't have the complexity to communicate with Rocky Linux or other systems with our storage network. Perhaps in the future, we might meet some difficulties, which is why I said it might be a good idea to have support for Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

We were a customer of Red Hat for Linux distribution. We studied Rocky Linux and learned from documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS, which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. It seems that Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

The initial setup of Rocky Linux is easy. It's well done. For my team, we haven't found any problems in the first initial setup. We work with an image with which we can reconstruct what we need of the virtual component.

I would rate Rocky Linux seven or eight as a minimum.

We switched to Rocky Linux because of the license price, and in our business, we don't need to have a higher cost as that is not a good idea.

We studied Rocky Linux through documentation and information on the internet. It's the successor of CentOS, which we used for five to seven years. When CentOS reached end of support, we tried to migrate. We got two alternatives, AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Rocky Linux is more similar to CentOS than AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is based on binary, and we identified some latency when using our application. Two or three servers are working on AlmaLinux currently, and all the rest was migrated to Rocky Linux.

I cannot understand the meaning of the question regarding whether we purchased Rocky Linux and AlmaLinux on the AWS Marketplace or somewhere else. I am not sure if we bought our current products on AWS Marketplace.

The problem with all products now is the manner of licensing. Even international or worldwide enterprises have difficulties with the cost of the new model of license in Cisco, Red Hat, and VMware. After the Broadcom acquisition of VMware, every time we ask for a budget, we have difficulties getting what we need. It's becoming difficult for enterprises. Even though I'm working for Sagemcom, a worldwide enterprise, they don't want to spend money on this kind of license if it is not needed.

Rocky Linux is popular in my region as it's a successor of CentOS. CentOS was very popular, so everybody that used CentOS and lost the support will look for a solution to substitute it. The nearest alternative to CentOS is Rocky Linux.

I would rate Rocky Linux a 7 out of 10.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three or four years. It is used for HPC, online assessments, and Ceph storage.

The solution is free and open source.

The OS choice in my project is quite specific. It is based on customer requirements, as they might want to use Rocky Linux or Ubuntu, depending on their needs.

The package versions can be quite older compared to other distributions such as Ubuntu.

I have been using this solution for about three or four years.

The deployment process is simple.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The scalability is quite good, though there are some issues with Rocky Linux. I would rate the scalability a five out of seven.

I rely on self-support and community resources.

Positive

I previously used VirtualBox but now tend to use Proxmox.

The initial setup is simple.

It involves a normal setup process using a USB drive or network installation.

It requires a plain installation. The server can be set up with UI, similar to a desktop installation in an on-premises environment.

I use Rocky Linux on the production server first. For Ubuntu installations, it depends on customer requirements.

The package management system requires attention when working with Rocky Linux.

There can be some issues with scalability that need consideration.

I would rate Rocky Linux an eight out of ten.

I use the solution in my company to do some automation stuff to run Ansible, and it has an administration server to provide all the Linux control like a client node can be connected to that master node. Basically, it is an administration node, and I can manage all of the on-premises machines. Basically, it acts as a bastion host or jump host for me.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability. The tool's stability is similar to CentOS. The project for CentOS is not functional as of now, a reason why I moved to Fedora and Rocky Linux by another distributor.

I have certain problems with the tool's DNS part, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three years and seven months.

Around 400 people in my company use the tool.

I have not contacted technical support for the solution.

I do use multiple operating systems, like CentOS, Red Hat, Fedora, and Rocky, which are all enterprise OS tools meant for commercial use only.

The product's installation, setup, and deployment are easy to manage.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. My company also uses AWS, Ubuntu versions, Amazon Linux versions, and Red Hat, so the images are used by opting for a cloud provider.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We work with a diverse set of tools and systems. We often need to experiment with various products and utilize standard development tools like compilers and debuggers to streamline our workflow.

We make extensive use of Rocky Linux for system configuration. It helps us keep our workstations in sync and ensures consistent settings across most of our machines.

We have a lot of PostgreSQL databases in our development work within our organization. Many of the tools and packages we need for this are readily available and easy to install and configure. The flexibility and availability of software packages make our workflow faster and more adaptable. It provides extensive community support and makes seeking recommendations, assistance, and access to software and settings easy. This supportive community aspect significantly simplifies our work in various environments, and it's something we greatly appreciate as developers.

Rocky Linux, being relatively new, initially lacked some of the software we were accustomed to from CentOS 7. There were some missing components and changes that required adjustment which is typical when transitioning between major releases in any distribution. Since it offers open-source documentation, there may be minor challenges in finding information. One of the potential issues is that if you don't pay for support, you may need to manage certain aspects on your own and rely on the community for assistance.

The operating system has proven to be stable and reliable in our experience.

We haven't encountered any major problems with the operating system itself. Our primary challenges typically revolve around software-related issues, especially when it comes to third-party software or our in-house applications.

Our decision to use CentOS, and now its successor, Rocky Linux, was rooted in the desire to stay close to the Red Hat ecosystem. We have continued this approach by selecting distributions that are as similar as possible to RHEL. The aim is to ensure that our development and testing process aligns with the standards of the industry and our customer base. We want to maintain a consistent and reliable development environment, which is why we choose distributions like Rocky Linux or AlmaLinux.

The implementation process is relatively straightforward. We typically start by cloning the repository, which contains various configurations and packages. Since we have a considerable number of workstations, specifically around eighty, we find this cloning approach to be efficient. Once the repository is cloned, the system can be set up to automatically perform updates and package installations.

When we need to set up a new workstation, we utilize a kickstart configuration which contains essential information about the workstation, such as its IP address and other specifications. After a new workstation is added, the kickstart process efficiently sets up the machine according to the specified parameters. The key is having a well-organized system for repository access and automation, which ensures a smooth and efficient workflow when working with Rocky Linux.

When evaluating a replacement for CentOS 7, we initially had to consider certain specialized requirements before making a decision. Regarding the choice between AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux, both options were strong contenders due to their close alignment with the CentOS path, which we were transitioning from. We conducted testing and analysis on both AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux. Initially, it was challenging to determine which one to choose, but we opted for the distribution that appeared to have a more significant user base and community support. This decision is often crucial, especially in open-source environments, as a larger user community can provide valuable assistance with development, information sharing, and problem-solving.

There is a wealth of valuable information available online when it comes to using Rocky Linux. It provides clear guidance on the initial setup steps to get your system up and running for experimentation. Once the system is up and running, you'll notice that, as a user, the experience is quite similar to using other Linux distributions like CentOS or RHEL. The primary differences tend to surface when it comes to system management and administration, where you may notice distinctions between Rocky Linux and other distributions. However, with the available resources and documentation, navigating these differences becomes manageable. I would rate it eight out of ten.