Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SUSE Linux Sold for $2.535 Billion

posted by takyon on Monday July 02 2018, @05:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the it's-free dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

SUSE Linux Sold for $2.5 Billion

British software company Micro Focus International has agreed to sell SUSE Linux and its associated software business to Swedish private equity group EQT Partners for $2.535 billion.

Also at The Register, Linux Journal, MarketWatch, and Reuters.

Previously: SuSE Linux has a New Owner
HPE Wraps Up $8.8bn Micro Focus Software Dump Spin-Off

Related: SUSE Pledges Endless Love for btrfs; Says Red Hat's Dumping Irrelevant

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
SUSE Linux Sold for $2.535 Billion | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 34 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday July 02 2018, @09:51PM (1 child)

    by frojack (1554) on Monday July 02 2018, @09:51PM (#701593) Journal

    Suse is late to the game of rolling releases, and quite frankly, not very good at it yet. They used to require periodic re-installs, they may have fixed that by now.

    As for BTRfs, abandon all hope of space management if you go that route. You suddenly find yourself out of space and not a clue where it all went. Deleting things can actually take up MORE room.

    I've lost data with btrfs corruption on three different occasions and had to restore from backups.
    The rollback feature is buggy, a proper FSCK is a 13 step procedure [nabble.com].

    BTRFS literally has nothing you need that wasn't already provided by LVM and more mature file systems. Its not faster, its not more reliable, and COW is a performance nightmare with large data structures like ISO images, its harder to manage, subvolumes are not actually limit-able as to size, and until recently it wasn't recommended for SSDs. Its the systemd of file systems and every other distro has walked away from it.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by eravnrekaree on Tuesday July 03 2018, @01:45AM

    by eravnrekaree (555) on Tuesday July 03 2018, @01:45AM (#701678)

    There was a problem with RAID 5/6. It was mentioned in the documentation you should not use the feature, yet. But it is being fixed. The problems will be ironed out. The basic concept of btrfs is sound, its similar to ZFS. In fact, if the ZFS license werent a big problem, its a great filesystem.

    You do mention problems with btrfs. The basic concept of the filesystem is sound, but yes, the problems you mention do need to be fixed.

    Intrinsically based on the technical merits rather than the implementation problems, I have a hard time seeing how XFS running over device mapper is intrinsically better than filesystem layer physical volume additions, snapshots, etc. When you want to add more space to the existing filesystem, you have to do a resize with some filesystems, some older filesystems are not designed for an efficient online resize operation, and may not even have a concept of a resize.

    The functionality targeted by btrfs is not be hard to implement , its been done in other filesystems. So, it really should be a feasible thing to do.