Rocky Linux Reviews

We have a normal three-tier architecture and new things on Docker with PySpark, using it for enrichment and loading a million records of data in our database. We have a Spark node with Apache Spark; it's part of our big data, similar to Hadoop big data.

Rocky Linux has impacted my organization very positively because we migrated everything from CentOS and Windows servers to Rocky Linux. Everything is clear, with good packaging, and now it's version 9.6, which is very important for us due to security problems since we are in Europe. Rocky Linux is very good for security and other aspects.

Since migrating to Rocky Linux, I've seen specific outcomes such as improved security because CentOS stopped the project, and security patches aren't being released. We need to maintain a system similar to Red Hat, which is very stable and has many features such as file system, topology, and containers.

My advice for others looking into using Rocky Linux is to choose it, especially for people coming from CentOS; I suggest Rocky Linux as the best option, not any other distribution.

My company has a business relationship with this vendor as a partner.

You can use my real name when publishing my review. You can use Joint Research Center, JRC, but not my real company name in the review as I'm working for another company.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is that all the applications used by our company are hosted in Rocky Linux servers, so we will be maintaining, remediating the vulnerabilities which are getting reported on the servers, patching the servers and making them up to date, and helping all the users who log into servers to use their applications without any issues.

A specific example of an application where I'm using Rocky Linux in my company is the POS machines which are used by the customers, where all the POS related applications are hosted in Rocky Linux operating system, so that's where Rocky Linux came into the picture, and from the OS level, we will be giving all the support wherever it is necessary.

The middleware packages such as Apache Tomcat, Java, HTTPD are all running on these Rocky Linux servers, so we ensure all those services are up and running without any issues.

The best features Rocky Linux offers are that it is much easier to use. Since it is open source, whatever issues we face, we can get answers from the community for each and every issue we encounter, so finding a solution for each problem is much easier, and that's the major feature I feel for Rocky Linux.

When comparing Rocky Linux to Red Hat, it is more stable, as whatever issues arise, we can solve them quickly, and since there is an open community, we receive help from everybody who is using this.

Rocky Linux has helped our organization significantly in terms of cost. If we were purchasing a Red Hat subscription, it would cost significantly more, but since Rocky Linux is open source and free, it has helped with cost reduction, allowing us to utilize those funds for other needed things.

When we moved from Red Hat to Rocky Linux, we saved around 70% of the cost which was used for subscriptions. That money is now used for other things such as middleware applications and monitoring applications including DataDog and Dynatrace.

To improve Rocky Linux, providing releases for each package, firmware, and kernel more quickly would be beneficial. Currently, it takes more than one month to release a new package or kernel, so speeding that up would help reduce reported vulnerability remediations.

Documenting the frequently asked questions and related issues in a PDF or Word document would be helpful so that everybody can refer to them, eliminating the need to post a question and wait for a reply, thus reducing time delay.

Currently, there aren't many needed improvements, only the support aspect needs a little improvement. Everything else is going well and smoothly.

I have been using Rocky Linux for more than six years.

Rocky Linux is stable, scalable, and it is very much easier to use.

Regarding customer support, since it is open source, most of the solutions are available on the community page, but even if we raise a support ticket, we receive a resolution or a reply from the team within two business days.

I would rate the customer support a seven.

Positive

Before choosing Rocky Linux, we were considering moving with Red Hat itself, planning to move from RHEL 8 to RHEL 9, but after considering the cost involving Red Hat, we thought about an open source solution, which led us to Rocky Linux.

When it comes to return on investment, a lot of money is saved since we moved from a purchased license to the open source provided by Rocky Linux. Time is also saved since whenever an issue arises, we get resolutions from the community without needing to raise a ticket with the support team.

When we encounter an issue, we look all over the internet, not only depending on the community, so whichever solutions provide us with proper resolution are considered.

My advice to others looking into using Rocky Linux is that it is much easier to use, it's scalable, performance is good, and there is no cost involved in using it.

I rate Rocky Linux nine out of ten.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is to use it as an enterprise server OS, providing a production-grade server platform equivalent to RHEL, running critical workloads, ERM, CRM, database servers like PostgreSQL and MySQL, and supporting broadcast and media workflows, where it serves as a stable OS for encoding, transcoding, and streaming platforms like Haivision and other OEM encoders, ensuring predictable performance for low-latency live streaming and content packaging workflows.

My use case with Rocky Linux also includes web and application hosting, cloud and virtualization, media and streaming workflows, serving as a stable foundation for live encoders, packagers, and CDN nodes; we use it with platforms such as Titan Live, Near-live, Haivision, and Wowza for OTT delivery, high-performance computing, and security-sensitive workloads.

The best features Rocky Linux offers include being 100% bug compatible compared to RHEL, providing enterprise stability for production workloads, meeting the need for reliability and long-term support, and being managed by the Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation, with its security and compliance features and migration tools making a significant difference for us.

Rocky Linux performs excellently in low-latency live streaming and content packaging workflows, as we use it for optimizing compatibility with the streaming platforms, utilizing an optimized kernel for networking, tuning profiles, IRQ affinity, security, reliability, and hardware and driver support.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted our organization; it works reliably and enhances our low-latency streaming workflows for our affiliates, performing well without noticeable glitches in our workflow. Since we started using Rocky Linux, we have drastically reduced low latency, especially across the public network, and we haven't seen much downtime, significantly decreasing downtime for the servers accommodating low live streaming workflows.

Rocky Linux could be improved with API-based tools that would help our streaming environment be monitored using DataMiner. Having REST API or SNMP-based protocols would be beneficial, as we want to integrate Rocky Linux for monitoring with our DataMiner platform.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three years.

We haven't tried to scale Rocky Linux since we recently started using this solution, but in the future, we definitely plan to scale as per our needs.

Rocky Linux is up to the mark; the solutions are really customer-focused and revenue-oriented, and the support level is extraordinary, providing on-time assistance, making it commendable.

Positive

The migration tools have been incredibly helpful; we use migrate2rocky.sh, a primary tool developed by the Rocky Foundation, which automates the conversion process of a compatible system to Rocky Linux, and applies it for log correlation and diagnosis of issues we encounter in our live streaming workflows.

Rocky Linux has a long-term life cycle for 10 years, being minimal and customizable, with performance tuning tools and an enterprise hardware ecosystem that stand out for our team.

My advice for others looking into using Rocky Linux is that if any organization is in search of a robust, stable, scalable solution in the broadcast media tech sector, they should definitely assess it, as they will likely achieve the desired results.

Currently, we are just a broadcaster and not a partner or reseller for Rocky products; however, in the future, we will explore a partnership for a B2B relationship.

We are currently satisfied with Rocky Linux, but if we encounter issues in the future, we will definitely highlight them.

I rate Rocky Linux 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is for QA and development, such as setting up environments, running automated test suites, validating services, and troubleshooting application behavior in a RHEL compatible environment.

I also use Rocky Linux to validate CI/CD workflows, containerized applications, and deployment-related issues in environments that are close to production.

The best features Rocky Linux offers in my experience are its stability, RHEL compatibility, strong security with SELinux, and reliable package management with DNF. It is also very useful for building QA environments that closely match production.

Compatibility has made the biggest difference, allowing me to reproduce production-like, RHEL environments for QA and catch deployment and configuration issues earlier, reducing environment-specific failures.

For QA, Rocky Linux's strong community support and predictable updates are highlights that make it easier to maintain consistent and reliable test environments over time.

Rocky Linux has impacted my organization positively by helping to create stable, production-like environments for QA and development, thus improving consistency, reducing environment-related issues, and making deployments more predictable. We have seen fewer environment-related issues and less time spent troubleshooting differences between QA and production, which has made testing and deployments more consistent.

Rocky Linux could improve its documentation and onboarding for newer users, especially around troubleshooting SELinux and system configuration.

The documentation and example configurations regarding SELinux and network configuration can sometimes be difficult to troubleshoot, especially for people coming from other Linux distributions. More practical examples and clearer error guidance would help solve these issues faster.

I have used Rocky Linux for approximately four years, mainly in RHEL compatible environments for development, testing, and server administration.

Rocky Linux is stable and reliable for workloads, especially for QA and development environments.

Scalability in Rocky Linux is very good, and it works well as workloads grow, particularly in virtualized and containerized environments, allowing us to scale resources without introducing major OS-level issues.

Customer support for Rocky Linux is good, and I remember that the team was helpful with various scenarios, questions, and issues. The community is very active with helpful forums.

Rocky Linux has a great community, and it is usually easy to find documentation, forums, and RHEL compatibility solutions while troubleshooting the most common issues, making it straightforward to solve problems.

We previously used CentOS and Ubuntu, but we noticed performance issues, leading us to explore options and find that Rocky Linux has great performance, especially in workloads, which prompted us to switch.

We have seen a positive return from eliminating OS licensing costs and reducing maintenance overhead. We save time through fewer environment-related issues and more consistent QA and deployment processes.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Rocky Linux is good because there are no licensing fees. The main costs are infrastructure setup, maintenance, and internal support rather than the operating system itself.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, I evaluated options including AlmaLinux, CentOS Stream, and RHEL. In the end, Rocky Linux was a good fit because of its RHEL compatibility, stability, and open-source model.

I would improve the documentation, troubleshooting tools, and integration guidance for modern DevOps, container, and AI workloads. Better migration guides and more real-world examples would also help teams adopt Rocky Linux faster.

The learning curve for Rocky Linux is moderate. If you already have experience with RHEL or CentOS, Rocky Linux feels very familiar, but areas such as SELinux and network configuration can take more time to master.

In my experience, update and patch management in Rocky Linux is straightforward and reliable. DNF makes it easy to manage packages and security updates, allowing us to test patches in QA before promoting them to production-like environments.

I would rate Rocky Linux's performance and resource efficiency under heavy workloads very well. It has been stable and resource-efficient with predictable CPU and memory usage, which is very important for QA and development environments.

It is relatively easy to integrate Rocky Linux with CI/CD tools, Docker, Podman, and Kubernetes, enabling us to build consistent environments for automated testing and deployment with minimal compatibility issues.

Rocky Linux provides a strong foundation for compliance through SELinux, with regular security updates, auditing, and system hardening. Meeting regulatory requirements still depends on how the organization configures and manages the environment.

Compared with CentOS Stream, Rocky Linux feels more predictable for stable enterprise environments because it focuses on RHEL compatibility. Updates are consistent and the community support is strong, even though commercial support options are not as extensive as RHEL.

My advice for those looking into using Rocky Linux is to ensure good infrastructure. Start by testing in a non-production environment and validate your applications, security policies, and automation workflows.

Rocky Linux has been a reliable and cost-effective platform for us, and its RHEL compatibility, stability, and strong community make it a solid choice for QA, development, and private cloud environments. I would rate this product a ten out of ten.

Our main use case for Rocky Linux is to host servers and developer environments for leading telecom vendors.

The best features Rocky Linux offers, in my experience, include long-term support, stability, and one-to-one binary compatibility with Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Rocky Linux has been a major driver for our cloud migration strategy and has proven to be one of the most cost-effective solutions for us, allowing us to save huge revenue while maintaining fantastic consistency with updates.

From a feature or experience perspective, it has been fantastic, but the only drawback we have seen is that even though there are timely deliveries of security patches and vulnerability fixes, the Rocky Linux Security Advisor or RLSA updates via the DNF utilities are broken or delayed. When we use the DNF functionality to search the affected RLSA or RLSA with CVE IDs, it's not working as expected, and the mirrors or the XML files need to be updated similar to Red Hat, which would help us keep our environment more secure and make maintenance easier. Otherwise, we have to do extensive research to identify the affected packages or RPMs with specific RLSA numbers.

I would like to see improvements in the security areas and updates of RLSA details as soon as the RLSA numbers are updated in the XML file. Security has been a major driver for IT organizations across the world and must be addressed at a faster pace. The unavailability of RLSA in the DNF search has been a major drawback that I would like to see improved in the future.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three years for our day-to-day use cases.

We have seen a stable Rocky Linux environment as of now.

Our solution does not currently involve architecture with scalability.

Customer support for Rocky Linux is excellent, and the documentation is also very good.

Positive

We were using CentOS previously, and as the lifecycle of CentOS was changed by Red Hat, we looked for an alternative, and Rocky Linux suited us best.

It has been a wonderful experience associating with Rocky Linux, and we would continue to use it full-fledged. I don't see that we have to choose any alternative OS in the near future.

ROI has been good as we have significant open source community involvement. In fact, we have increased our footprints, allowing us to onboard more resources or employees, which is a positive sign.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Rocky Linux is good and streamlined, with no hiccups.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, we evaluated other options including Ubuntu, Oracle Linux, and a few other flavors, but since Rocky Linux has one-to-one binary compatibility with Red Hat, it was the best fit.

Rocky Linux has been a ready-to-use solution for us, so we don't need to have vendor dependency or vendor lock for any support or help. The community has been a great help in resolving all issues, and while from a monetary point of view, it has resulted in significant savings, we cannot provide the exact numbers as some of this is company confidential.

There is not much need for further improvements at this juncture.

If you want to get a premium product with the best in-house community support, Rocky Linux would be the one solution.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Rocky Linux a 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is web hosting.

I have used Rocky Linux to host Drupal websites for my employer.

I don't have anything else to add about my use case or how I use Rocky Linux.

The best feature Rocky Linux offers is compatibility with Red Hat. This compatibility helps me because packages that aren't specifically available to the Rocky Linux repositories are able to be installed as long as the correct binary for the correct corresponding version of Red Hat and Rocky is selected.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to migrate away from CentOS 7 as a result of the end-of-life for that operating system and then the end of CentOS 8, so we were able to move away from it without losing data and without having to rebuild VMs from scratch. The migration process went smoothly, with the main thing that stood out being the exchanging of repository links and the use of purpose-built scripts by our infrastructure and hosting team that took care of the heavy lifting.

I don't have specific suggestions on how Rocky Linux can be improved.

I don't want to add more about the needed improvements, even minor things or little annoyances.

I have been using Rocky Linux for a couple of years.

In my experience, Rocky Linux is stable.

Rocky Linux's scalability is good; it has handled growth or changing needs well considering that it was able to scale up our high availability environments for our web hosting services.

I haven't needed to reach out for help regarding customer support for Rocky Linux.

Positive

I previously used CentOS, and the reason for the change to Rocky Linux was because of the end-of-life of CentOS 7 and 8 since those distributions were being discontinued and we needed a platform to move to that wasn't going to cost us an arm and a leg for licensing.

I have seen a return on investment since there was definitely money saved at the time due to the lack of need for licensing since Rocky is available openly.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been that there was no cost associated with licensing for Rocky at the time because it was available openly and freely.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, we evaluated one other option, which was AlmaLinux, and we chose to go with Rocky instead.

My advice for others looking into using Rocky Linux is to be sure to look at tutorials on how to get started if they are new users to the Red Hat RPMs or if they are unfamiliar with Linux as a whole.

I think it's been a great operating system to use both professionally and personally, and I've been able to adapt Rocky Linux into my WSL environment on my personal computer running Windows 11 and WSL Rocky.

I found out about the interview through LinkedIn.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Rocky Linux a 10.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is the user-friendly commands and being able to work much easier on the RHEL supported flavor as compared to other flavors whereby you have to ask for escalation when you want to install something or change file permissions or anything of that sort.

A specific example of how Rocky Linux has made things easier for me is that it has streamlined processes by not requiring privilege escalation all the time. Once I'm logged in as root, I don't have to escalate using sudo, which makes things much easier, especially since it's not a security risk when proper restrictions are set up in the perimeter with SSH and firewall rules and jump host, making it much smoother.

The best features Rocky Linux offers include not having to escalate privileges all the time, and it is binary compatible with RHEL systems, which means long-term support, making it much more predictable when it comes to updates. It also has a strong focus on enterprise workloads.

Binary compatibility and long-term support features have made things simpler because you can easily integrate the two systems with your Red Hat kernel. The long-term predictable updates make it a clear choice because I know that whatever I'm implementing now is guaranteed to receive updates in the long term.

Rocky Linux has positively impacted my organization by making things simpler, especially with not having to escalate privileges all the time using sudo as compared to Ubuntu flavors.

I've experienced less downtime in terms of having to focus on updates, which improves the security posture. Rocky Linux is compatible with automation tools, including Ansible, whereby we can deploy the infrastructure using code. It easily integrates with other containers and automation tools, making it easier to push updates, particularly security updates, and upgrade packages.

At the moment, I don't see much improvement that can be made to Rocky Linux. We work in IT and security is the main factor that we focus on, so perhaps more security control rules could be implemented. However, so far, I don't see much room for improvement.

I have been using Rocky Linux for three to four years.

Rocky Linux is stable.

In terms of scalability, you need to have automation tools.

The customer support for Rocky Linux is good, as it offers long-term support.

Neutral

I haven't necessarily switched. I used Ubuntu before, and we still use Ubuntu even in this current company along with Rocky Linux.

It is not difficult to deploy Rocky Linux in my organization which is set up on a private cloud.

I never worked on the implementation or pricing part, but I know that Rocky Linux is free, and I can download it and deploy it in whatever environment I have, whether it be H3C, VMware, or Hyper-V. I am not involved in costs.

Regarding return on investment in terms of time saved with automation, I wouldn't know about money saved as I am not in the finance department.

I never worked on the pricing part, but I know that Rocky Linux is free, and I can download it and deploy it in whatever environment I have, whether it be H3C, VMware, or Hyper-V. I am not involved in costs.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, I didn't evaluate other options.

My advice to others looking into using Rocky Linux is they should go for it. There isn't much difference compared to other flavors, and it is much closer to RHEL systems, so whatever commands you would use in your Red Hat, you would use in Rocky Linux. I rate Rocky Linux 8 out of 10.

For the last two years, I have been using Rocky Linux for our project. I do all the things: installations of Rocky Linux, coding in Rocky Linux, and using Rocky Linux as a platform.

We use Rocky Linux as a base OS for our project, and on top of Rocky Linux OS, we are building our project. We have chosen Rocky Linux because it supports long-term support.

We are using Rocky Linux for one of our projects in CommScope, using it as a base OS, and on top of that, we are installing many RPMs and making it customized. We are adding numerous security patches, as Rocky Linux continuously provides security updates and patches, which is one of the best benefits we are getting. We are also using Rocky Linux for high availability purposes, with approximately 11 to 12 server clusters.

We are using Rocky Linux because it has strong security, compatibility with RHEL, and enterprise-grade stability, which is the main reason for choosing Rocky Linux. The plus point is that they regularly provide security updates and patches, which is very helpful to us.

Rocky Linux offers strong security and enterprise-grade stability as its best features. These are the two main advantages compared to others.

Enterprise-grade stability refers to the fact that it uses the RHEL source code, ensuring compatibility, and is suitable for servers, production environments, and critical applications, built to be a reliable, long-term support OS.

In terms of security, we are getting regular security patches and updates, which is one of the best use cases I've noticed positively impacting Rocky Linux in my organization.

Day by day, the vulnerabilities are decreasing, and as we have implemented good practices, there is less downtime.

Currently, I have nothing to say about how Rocky Linux can be improved.

The rolling update for Rocky Linux is very limited and focused on stability, so the software may not always be the latest version, which is something they need to improve.

I have been working in my current field for the last two years and eight months.

Rocky Linux is stable.

Regarding scalability, Rocky Linux is a very good OS, and we haven't faced any issues currently.

Currently, the customer support for Rocky Linux is not fully developed and is in a growing stage; the customer support is also not very responsive.

Previously, we were using CentOS, which reached its end of life, prompting us to switch to Rocky Linux because we found it is an LTS with stability and long-term support.

The pricing for Rocky Linux has no major difference compared to enterprise-level software, which is similar to enterprise-level Linux, so there isn't much difference and it's a good experience with both the older and newer versions compared to CentOS and Rocky Linux.

We checked some enterprise-level OSs such as Debian before choosing Rocky Linux, but we found we were more inclined toward Rocky Linux as it gives LTS support and stability, so we moved to Rocky Linux.

If you are looking for a long-term support OS, an LTS, then I recommend choosing Rocky Linux, as they are releasing many patches and updates regarding security.

Rocky Linux is best for someone who wants good scalability, enterprise-grade stability, substantial community engagement, compatibility with RHEL, and strong security. I also feel there is good documentation with Rocky Linux, along with providing long-term support, which makes it better to choose Rocky Linux.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Rocky Linux is for the Nutanix environment, where we have a data center and everything is hosted there, including all the services and systems. Rocky Linux is the main OS of the Nutanix, which we use for hosting the servers.

In the Nutanix environment, Rocky Linux makes security hardening easier because we have guidelines to follow for those processes as per their advice.

My organization has seen positive impacts, particularly in security, as it is more secure and scalable. The commands are quite easy to use in the open-source environment, and scaling up or down is simple. Overall, it is more scalable and security-wise, it is good, and after using many commands, I become familiar with them.

The best features Rocky Linux offers, in my experience, are its simplicity, which helps us troubleshoot effectively, along with enhanced security features, security hardening capabilities, and the ability to perform regular patches.

My organization has seen positive impacts, particularly in security, as it is more secure and scalable. The commands are quite easy to use in the open-source environment, and scaling up or down is simple. Overall, it is more scalable and security-wise, it is good, and after using many commands, I become familiar with them.

I am not an expert on Rocky Linux, but I do not have anything to say regarding improvements; I think it is doing better.

I chose a rating of eight out of ten because Rocky Linux must grow more; it is not as comparable to Red Hat, which is why I took off those two points.

I have been using Rocky Linux for a couple of years.

Rocky Linux is stable.

The scalability of Rocky Linux is very good.

We take customer support from Nutanix, and I think Nutanix support users are familiar with Rocky Linux, so I find the customer support to be very good.

Positive

I am not sure what solution we previously used before Rocky Linux, as I am new to the organization. I think they might have used VMware, but those were not on Rocky Linux, and the licensing cost was likely higher, which is why we changed to Rocky Linux in the Nutanix environment.

Rocky Linux is a product of CentOS, and I have experience using CentOS as well. I think CentOS and Rocky Linux are similar to each other, with almost all of the features being similar.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Rocky Linux are favorable because they come bundled with the Nutanix environment, making the costs and licensing cheaper than the VMware environment, which is why we chose the Nutanix environment.

I have seen a return on investment, including money saved and time saved.

The pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Rocky Linux are favorable because they come bundled with the Nutanix environment, making the costs and licensing cheaper than the VMware environment, which is why we chose the Nutanix environment.

Before choosing Rocky Linux, I evaluated options based on cost.

My advice to others looking into using Rocky Linux is to go ahead and use it. I give Rocky Linux a rating of eight out of ten.

My typical use case for Rocky Linux is that it's the backend operating system for managing where we have a lot of scripts managing networks.

I don't have a use case for AI integration yet because we simply did not look into it, so I don't know if it's there or not.

The experience of working with Rocky Linux is the same as with other Linux distributions; there was no difficulty for me in learning how to work with it.

Rocky Linux is similar to other distributions. I did some research on Google, and then it was manageable without needing documentation.

To be honest, Rocky Linux is almost similar to each Linux distribution, so I have no specific reason why it should offer me its features.

I haven't noticed anything special that could be done better in Rocky Linux.

I switched less than a year ago from my previous company, and I think they have been using it for one or two years.

The experience of working with Rocky Linux is the same as with other Linux distributions; there was no difficulty for me in learning how to work with it.

First of all, there is in-house knowledge for handling technical support or community issues.

If I have specific issues that couldn't be resolved by myself, I either contact an outside ICT company with specialized engineers or contact the vendors.

We have not yet needed to contact a vendor regarding Rocky Linux.

Positive

It's equal whether it's now CentOS, Rocky Linux, or Ubuntu; actually, a bash script remains a bash script.

A server on VMware rolls out the template, so it's a one-hour job to deploy it.

It's equal whether it's now CentOS, Rocky Linux, or Ubuntu; actually, a bash script remains a bash script.

I'm just using tools, so I'm not in any decision making.

The decision is made at the customer, so it's not my decision. I'm not in any decision maker role.

All these decisions have been made. I'm just following it, and for me, there's no real preference between A or B.

I switched less than a year ago from my previous company, and I think they have been using it for one or two years.

It's a hard question to determine the most helpful or useful features in this tool.

I rate Rocky Linux eight out of ten. An eight means that I'm satisfied with it; a product having a ten never exists because things can always be better.

I have nothing really in mind that could make Rocky Linux a nine out of ten.