Re: New distro question
Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once a fedora release goes end-of-life, there are no more updates, period. For example, Fedora Core 6 went end-of-life a few months ago, and hasn't had a security update of any sort released since. So you have to upgrade the system to the next Fedora release (or the one after) to keep getting any sort of updates at all. Wow. As glacial as Debian is to release things, I'm fairly certain I can still get updates for ancient releases. Couldn't you just download the src.rpm and rebuild it for your system? -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Michael ODonnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe RHEL3 U9 was the last full active development release Unfortunately, the bug in question was apparently introduced with the U8 release which I understand was supposed to be the final one, but it's bad enough that I'd suspect there'll be a final-and-this-time-we-really-mean-it-no-fooling U10 release. ;- Ahh, this reminds me when Sun said, Sun OS 4.1 is dead. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.1. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.2. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.3. And This time we really mean it! Oh, wait, sorry, we forgot something. Here's 4.1.3_u1. But this is it! Damn, all right, here's 4.1.3_u1a. But we're serious - Okay, 4.1.4_u1b, but that's it! Fine, Here's 4.1.4, We're done! Move over to Solaris 2.3, er, 4, I mean 5... -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On 04/11/2008 08:36 AM, Paul Lussier wrote: Wow. As glacial as Debian is to release things, I'm fairly certain I can still get updates for ancient releases. Couldn't you just download the src.rpm and rebuild it for your system? Sarge security updates ended on March 31 (~1 year after etch became stable). http://www.debian.org/News/2008/20080229 -Mark ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael ODonnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe RHEL3 U9 was the last full active development release Unfortunately, the bug in question was apparently introduced with the U8 release which I understand was supposed to be the final one, but it's bad enough that I'd suspect there'll be a final-and-this-time-we-really-mean-it-no-fooling U10 release. ;- Ahh, this reminds me when Sun said, Sun OS 4.1 is dead. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.1. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.2. No, wait, we really need to fix something. Here's 4.1.3. And This time we really mean it! Oh, wait, sorry, we forgot something. Here's 4.1.3_u1. But this is it! Damn, all right, here's 4.1.3_u1a. But we're serious - Okay, 4.1.4_u1b, but that's it! Fine, Here's 4.1.4, We're done! Move over to Solaris 2.3, er, 4, I mean 5... Paul, a friend of ours had to get a SunOS system going last fall. He had spare Sparc 20s, a stack of disks and a Sun support contract. He ended up having to buy a disk on eBay. And Sun had an update for him for SunOS. His customers require 15 years of support so he has to keep that system around for another 15 years :-( ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow. As glacial as Debian is to release things, I'm fairly certain I can still get updates for ancient releases. Nope. As others have pointed out, the stable Debian releases are maintained for one year after the release of their successor. After that, they're EOL'ed. This usually isn't *that* big a deal, since Debian's stable release cycle is usually once every two to three years anyway. But it's not quite like the 7 years RHEL/CentOS gives you. Fedora probably has more in common with Debian unstable than stable. Although Fedora does have a defined release cycle and development roadmap, they're not afraid to make big changes (i.e., break stuff) to introduce the latest-and-greatest, or even just to try something out to see how it flies in the real world. Couldn't you just download the src.rpm and rebuild it for your system? Sure, assuming the latest-and-greatest still builds with everything from an old release. See above about big changes. By analogy, take a snapshot of unstable from two years ago, and try and get a package from today's unstable to build. Good luck with that. ;-) Besides, the whole point of having a distro is so you don't have to build from source. :) On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ahh, this reminds me when Sun said, Sun OS 4.1 is dead. [seven more updates] Man, how *dare* they support their products! ;-) Contrast this with Microsoft. Exchange 2000 was in the Extended Support phase when DST was changed around last year. Extended Support means security fixes only. So at first they said they simply would not release an updated time zone tables for Exchange unless you had an Extended Support Contract (tens of thousands of dollars per year). A lot of people complained, so they offered a special deal: For the low low price of $4000, you could get time zone updates for their Extended Support products. I think I like Sun's way better. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 20:50 -0400, Frank DiPrete wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. But that's the fun part. :) There's the rub for us MIS types. Fedora works great but after 2 years, the updates go away if you don't keep upgrading. A repo might not exist for a 2 year old release if something needs to be added that wasn't on the dist. CD. For my desktops, I probably want the latest greatest tools. For my servers, I just want it to work and be secure. IMO this release cycle is one of the major differences between Linux and Solaris. I just ran a 1995 copy of traceroute from SunOS (not Solaris) on a stock Solaris 10 box. That'd be Redhat 2.0 era? I lost count of the number of times the kernel outran VMware and Win4Lin installs. On the otherhand, each update of an app or the kernel brings bug, speed and security fixes and might even add features that are desired. Solaris' awk/tar/etc is bug for bug compatible with the 1995 version. Pros and cons each way ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Michael ODonnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That way the list can continue to have discussions [...] with out having me bother everyone. :) The signal on this channel is Linux, so if you're talking Linux you're not bothering anyone because that's why we're all gathered here. What?!?! Since when? I thought this was the political-religious debate list where we only violently agreed that we disagreed on everything and beat all dead horses to a pulp?! Ben? What's going on here? Someone seems to be trying to subvert our channel! -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 09:13 -0400, Tom Buskey wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 20:50 -0400, Frank DiPrete wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. But that's the fun part. :) There's the rub for us MIS types. Fedora works great but after 2 years, the updates go away if you don't keep upgrading. A repo might not exist for a 2 year old release if something needs to be added that wasn't on the dist. CD. Yeah, I know. I meant to include an explicit but of course, this sucks for you MIS types in there, but apparently forgot it. For my desktops, I probably want the latest greatest tools. For my servers, I just want it to work and be secure. And if I were in a position where I was maintaining more than just my own, singular, personal server, I probably *would* go RHEL instead of Fedora. (Actually, that *is* what I did in a prior life). IMO this release cycle is one of the major differences between Linux and Solaris. I just ran a 1995 copy of traceroute from SunOS (not Solaris) on a stock Solaris 10 box. That'd be Redhat 2.0 era? Yeah, I think we might still have compatibility with RHL7.x apps on RHEL5, but nothing quite that far back... On the otherhand, each update of an app or the kernel brings bug, speed and security fixes and might even add features that are desired. Solaris' awk/tar/etc is bug for bug compatible with the 1995 version. Pros and cons each way Indeed. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What is the advantage of a debian based distro compared to rpm based? (Did I say that? Keep it civil. ) Really? Nothing. Linux is Linux is Linux and Unix is Unix is Unix and Linux is Solaris is BSD is HP-UX is AI^H^H (oops, almost got carried away there :) The biggest differences boil down to: - The packaging system and associated tools (they all suck in their own way) - The location/formats of config files (they all suck in their own way) - Choice of SysVinit vs. BSD's rc.local (they both suck in their own way) When it comes to Linux distros, really, what's to be different? All of them use the same kernel, so it's not like moving between Solaris and AIX where you're moving between completely different OSes. They all use the same software, so it's not like what you run on one you can't get or run on another. It boils down to configuration, packaging, and system administration. Which, at a high level, is really the only difference between all other variants of UNIX. The same commands work across the board: ls, cd, rm, tr, sed, awk, etc. As for windowing environments, you can run whatever you want on any of them, right? I've been the using same exact desktop for 15+ years, first under twm, then ctwm, then (and now) fvwm. If you're a GNOME or KDE fan, you can still use both of those monstrosities under any of the Linux distros too. IMO, the biggest difference between a RH-based and Debian-based system is the packaging and tools and the basic sysadmin configuration: RHDebian -- rpm dpkg* yum apt* chkconfig update-rc.d /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/if*/etc/network/interfaces /etc/xinetd.* /etc/inetd.conf Those right there are the major differences I can think of. The most obvious ones being the packaging tool sets. I haven't played with a RPM-based system in nearly 8 years since I switched to Debian (I haven't even played with other Debian-based systems yet, I haven't seen the need or had the time). The thing I liked initially about Debian was the ability to install once and upgrade forever. I assume that rpm with yum has this capability by now as well, but Debian had this with apt long before yum existed. My system at home is a 9 year-old PIII which had Debian installed on it 6 years ago and I've never re-installed anything, yet I'm up-to-date with whatever I'm running on it thanks to 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. So, take that for what it's worth. If you're simply concerned about moving between different distros of Linux, that's about all the difference right there. If you're concerned about moving to other versions of UNIX, I highly recommend checking out the BSDs. I find OpenBSD with it's superior networking code makes a much nicer boot-loader for Emacs than does Linux... :) -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Šarūnas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In case of Debian, unstable is quite stable actually ... Last time I used it (about 14 months ago), Debian unstable had package churn on the order of tens or hundreds of megabytes per week. Unstable *is* just that :) Though, that being said, I've lived on the testing/unstable edge of Debian for years with no serious repurcussions. -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [1] What we call Fedora used to be known as Red Hat Linux. RHL officially ended with version 9. So call RHL 9 Fedora 0. Continuing further back, RHL 7.2 was being developed around the same time as RHEL 2.1. And tune in next week when Ben takes us through the SunOS - Solaris name mapping! Following that will be a general discussion tracking the ATT releases and how they were tracked by BSD :) -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. Can't that be avoided by only updating those thing installed that have available updates? Why would you install something unnecessarilly, or upgrade something you don't use/need ? Especially on any system requiring security? I've seen lots of security updates go by for things which just don't apply strictly because on most systems that have that package installed, it doesn't matter, or, on the systems where it might, that package isn't installed. -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
And tune in next week when Ben takes us through the SunOS - Solaris name mapping! Following that will be a general discussion tracking the ATT releases and how they were tracked by BSD :) This UN*X family tree is known to be b0rken in some ways but it's still interesting: http://www.levenez.com/unix/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 10:03 -0400, Paul Lussier wrote: Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. Can't that be avoided by only updating those thing installed that have available updates? Why would you install something unnecessarilly, or upgrade something you don't use/need ? Especially on any system requiring security? Once a fedora release goes end-of-life, there are no more updates, period. For example, Fedora Core 6 went end-of-life a few months ago, and hasn't had a security update of any sort released since. So you have to upgrade the system to the next Fedora release (or the one after) to keep getting any sort of updates at all. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What is the advantage of a debian based distro compared to rpm based? (Did I say that? Keep it civil. ) Really? Nothing. Linux is Linux is Linux and Unix is Unix is Unix and Linux is Solaris is BSD is HP-UX is AI^H^H (oops, almost got carried away there :) The biggest differences boil down to: - The packaging system and associated tools (they all suck in their own way) - The location/formats of config files (they all suck in their own way) - Choice of SysVinit vs. BSD's rc.local (they both suck in their own way) and MacOSX launchd and Solaris 10's SMF (I miss /etc/init.d/* sometimes). NetBSD hasn't used rc.local for awhile. OpenBSD still uses it. When it comes to Linux distros, really, what's to be different? All of them use the same kernel, so it's not like moving between Solaris and AIX where you're moving between completely different OSes. They all use the same software, so it's not like what you run on one you can't get or run on another. On the surface they're all similar. It's when you get in deeper that it matters. Most of the time you don't have to go too deep as a user or even an admin. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Though, that being said, I've lived on the testing/unstable edge of Debian for years with no serious repurcussions. Over the years, I've developed a theory that software has race memory. For example, Debian clearly does not like me. For example, in my foray into etch when it was the testing release (last year), my X server got upgraded out of existence three times. Once, the system even popped up a dialog(1) box telling me that the X packages were being broken and I'd probably have to manually reinstall them. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Tom Buskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Choice of SysVinit vs. BSD's rc.local (they both suck in their own way) and MacOSX launchd and Solaris 10's SMF ... There's some other new dependency-based service manager init-replacement thing in the FOSS world. I forget the name. It's packaged as an option in Debian (of course). It looked appealing, but I didn't care enough to try it. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
and MacOSX launchd and Solaris 10's SMF (I miss /etc/init.d/* sometimes). NetBSD hasn't used rc.local for awhile. OpenBSD still uses it. And launchd was new in 10.4. Prior to that it was SystemStarter (which a few things in 10.4 still get started by, see /System/Library/StartupItems) -Shawn ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
There's some other new dependency-based service manager init-replacement thing in the FOSS world. I forget the name. It's packaged as an option in Debian (of course). It looked appealing, but I didn't care enough to try it. Upstart? http://upstart.ubuntu.com/ Ubuntu started using it in 6.10 -Shawn ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Shawn O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's some other new dependency-based service manager init-replacement thing in the FOSS world. I forget the name. It's packaged as an option in Debian (of course). It looked appealing, but I didn't care enough to try it. Upstart? http://upstart.ubuntu.com/ Ubuntu started using it in 6.10 It's looking more like everyone's favorite editor/terminal. *sigh* At least the source of most of them are available. I'm running 7.04 on my laptop and still see /etc/init.d. Maybe it's 7.10? Solaris 10 still has some stuff in /etc/init.d and you can add stuff there. The CD mounter (vold) is in both /etc/init.d and SMF. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 11:05 -0400, Shawn O'Shea wrote: There's some other new dependency-based service manager init-replacement thing in the FOSS world. I forget the name. It's packaged as an option in Debian (of course). It looked appealing, but I didn't care enough to try it. Upstart? http://upstart.ubuntu.com/ Ubuntu started using it in 6.10 Its also being used in Fedora 9, albeit with some stuff cobbled together for sysvinit compatibility. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Tom Buskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://upstart.ubuntu.com/ Ubuntu started using it in 6.10 It's looking more like everyone's favorite editor/terminal. *sigh* Linux is looking more and more like Microsoft Windows every day. (This is not a compliment.) Everything needs its own daemon, an object library with complete class hierarchy, D-Bus hooks, and at least two GUI management tools. But a man page and good command-line/script integration are optional. Blech. Anyone want to give a talk on switching to *BSD? HHOS. I'm running 7.04 on my laptop and still see /etc/init.d. Maybe it's 7.10? On Ubuntu 7.10, I also see init scripts there. I'm guessing UpStart still uses those, it just controls them in a more sophisticated fashion. I would expect that for compatibility reasons. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Once a fedora release goes end-of-life, there are no more updates, period. For example, Fedora Core 6 went end-of-life a few months ago, and hasn't had a security update of any sort released since. So you have to upgrade the system to the next Fedora release (or the one after) to keep getting any sort of updates at all. Some of the systems I work with are still based on the steam-powered RHEL3 distribution and to our surprise we are not (well, not always) being told to go fsck ourselves when we report bugs against it. Of course, the RHAT folks I've been dealing with have been careful to remind me that no further development is being done on RHEL3 and that I shouldn't expect much support, but a number of security updates and a limited set of app/lib updates have nevertheless been provided, and I received a new kernel source tree for the 2.4.21-54.EL kernel just this morning containing a fix for a bug I reported. I've always been partial to Debian over RHAT (I'm another who's been running the Unstable branch on several machines since approx 2000 with no regrets) but this sort of treatment from RHAT definitely doesn't suck, so credit where credit is due... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
I believe RHEL3 U9 was the last full active development release Unfortunately, the bug in question was apparently introduced with the U8 release which I understand was supposed to be the final one, but it's bad enough that I'd suspect there'll be a final-and-this-time-we-really-mean-it-no-fooling U10 release. ;- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 12:59 -0400, Michael ODonnell wrote: I believe RHEL3 U9 was the last full active development release Unfortunately, the bug in question was apparently introduced with the U8 release which I understand was supposed to be the final one, but it's bad enough that I'd suspect there'll be a final-and-this-time-we-really-mean-it-no-fooling U10 release. ;- Nope, there won't be. There might be a fix released as an update available via rhn, but no, there will not be a U10. Trust me on that. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 12:59:08PM -0400, Michael ODonnell wrote: I believe RHEL3 U9 was the last full active development release Unfortunately, the bug in question was apparently introduced with the U8 release which I understand was supposed to be the final one, but it's bad enough that I'd suspect there'll be a final-and-this-time-we-really-mean-it-no-fooling U10 release. ;- Just out of curiosity, what bug did you run across? Don't suppose there's a BZ open on it? -- David W. Aquilina [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
what bug did you run across? Don't suppose there's a BZ open on it? Sorry, I don't have the number in front of me at the moment but here's the patch that fixes it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=294675 Symptom is that the system appears to hang when filesystems are unmounted, with larger filesystems being more likely to suffer the bug than smaller ones. If you're willing to wait (sometimes longer than 30 minutes) it does eventually recover but it's so busy in the meantime (apparently handling some long deferred dnode bookkeeping with some b0rken locking) that the cooling fans often throttle up to handle the load... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 14:24 -0400, Michael ODonnell wrote: what bug did you run across? Don't suppose there's a BZ open on it? Sorry, I don't have the number in front of me at the moment but here's the patch that fixes it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=294675 Symptom is that the system appears to hang when filesystems are unmounted, with larger filesystems being more likely to suffer the bug than smaller ones. If you're willing to wait (sometimes longer than 30 minutes) it does eventually recover but it's so busy in the meantime (apparently handling some long deferred dnode bookkeeping with some b0rken locking) that the cooling fans often throttle up to handle the load... Oh, ew, I'm somewhat familiar with that one. At least, peripherally. I can't remember if it was Eric Sandeen, Jeff Moyer or Josef Bacik working on it... Ah, the suffix on the patch says Josef. :) I thought we'd already pushed an errata kernel to deal with that... -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 02:24:16PM -0400, Michael ODonnell wrote: Sorry, I don't have the number in front of me at the moment but here's the patch that fixes it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=294675 Symptom is that the system appears to hang when filesystems are unmounted, with larger filesystems being more likely to suffer the bug than smaller ones. If you're willing to wait (sometimes longer than 30 minutes) it does eventually recover but it's so busy in the meantime (apparently handling some long deferred dnode bookkeeping with some b0rken locking) that the cooling fans often throttle up to handle the load... Heh, I'm familiar with that one... bug 413731. There won't be a new set of ISOs spun for it, but it will be fixed in the next rhel3 errata. -- David W. Aquilina [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Upstart (init.d replacement) Re: New distro question
init-replacement thing in the FOSS world. I forget the name. It's Upstart? http://upstart.ubuntu.com/ Ubuntu started using it in 6.10 I'm running 7.04 on my laptop and still see /etc/init.d. Maybe it's 7.10? You're both right - it shipped with Ubuntu 6.10 or so but init.d isn't fully deprecated for a couple cycles so upgrades will work and they don't have to break all packages at once, so init.d will continue to work for now too.. -- Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
New distro question
I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. I'm familiar with FC6, due to a myth install (thanks Jarod, Ben et al) so I would not mind installing FC8. I'm not interested in FC9 only due to the fact that it hasn't been released yet, and I want something relatively stable. I have downloaded FC8 and opensuse10.3. Any others I should consider? It doesn't have to be cool, although that is ok. It does have to be functional and reasonably supportable. MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. TIA Bruce ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. Anything specific? If you're otherwise happy with CentOS, we might be able to help address those problems. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date ... I want something relatively stable. Those are, to some extent, conflicting goals. For example, in the world of Hats, you've got RHEL (the thing CentOS is a clone of), which gets a major release every other year or so, and strives for minimal changes in the interim. So it can become out-of-date easier. But it's supported for years and years. Contrast that with Fedora, which tries to have a release every six months, but stops being supported after 13 months, and is more willing to break things in the name of progress. A similar scenario applies to Debian unstable vs stable. Not trying to talk you into or out of anything, just giving you a heads up. ... suited for scientific calculations. There's a distro called Scientific Linux. That's as much as I know about it. :) http://www.scientificlinux.org/ I have downloaded FC8 and opensuse10.3. Any others I should consider? I'd definitely check-out Ubuntu. While it's not magic (I've recently had a situation where a wireless gadget worked better on Fedora than Ubuntu), it's got some nice features. It's sort-of based on Debian. http://www.ubuntu.org MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. You tell us: Does it matter? :) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
RE: New distro question
I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. ... It doesn't have to be cool, although that is ok. It does have to be functional and reasonably supportable. MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. Did you look at Scientific Linux? Not only does it wear a lab coat, but it has updated graphviz and R releases. It's a RHEL clone like CentOS, so if you are having trouble with CentOS already, I'd assume you will see the same thing with SL. https://www.scientificlinux.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Linux You should also look into Debian, it's Free, supportable, stable, has a hypnotising swirly logo, and over 3.5e3 packages available in it's repositories (perhaps the scientific calculation software you are looking for is already part of the release). Patrick ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Labitt, Bruce wrote: I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. Personally, we use Mandriva. It generally just works. It was derived from a RedHat ancestor, so it is ought to be familiar to RedHat folk. They have a new release every year typically. The updates are fairly quick in between. I am not familiar with their scientific packages. I know there are some in the repositories, especially the contrib repository. Anything in particular you are looking for. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
RE: New distro question
Umm, it is probably that I'm not used to it... ;) I find it awkward compared to either FC6 (gnome) or suse (kde). I can't put my finger on it yet. I didn't install it, so even now, after futzing about with it, I'm not quite sure what is on it, and where. The original owner doesn't care if I install something new on it. Somehow this copy of Centos feels older than FC6. As for stable - what I really meant to say, is NOT bleeding edge. That is all. I'll check out scientific linux out of curiosity. How sensitive is ubuntu to hardware? At home I couldn't install it on computer that I intended to run myth because it wouldn't recognize my hardware. What is the advantage of a debian based distro compared to rpm based? (Did I say that? Keep it civil. ) As for mattering about MIS support, it usually ends up being helpful. It is useful to have local support, I've got to admit. That way the list can continue to have discussions about relevant and irrelevant topics with out having me bother everyone. :) Bruce -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Scott Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 12:17 PM To: Greater NH Linux User Group Subject: Re: New distro question On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. Anything specific? If you're otherwise happy with CentOS, we might be able to help address those problems. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date ... I want something relatively stable. Those are, to some extent, conflicting goals. For example, in the world of Hats, you've got RHEL (the thing CentOS is a clone of), which gets a major release every other year or so, and strives for minimal changes in the interim. So it can become out-of-date easier. But it's supported for years and years. Contrast that with Fedora, which tries to have a release every six months, but stops being supported after 13 months, and is more willing to break things in the name of progress. A similar scenario applies to Debian unstable vs stable. Not trying to talk you into or out of anything, just giving you a heads up. ... suited for scientific calculations. There's a distro called Scientific Linux. That's as much as I know about it. :) http://www.scientificlinux.org/ I have downloaded FC8 and opensuse10.3. Any others I should consider? I'd definitely check-out Ubuntu. While it's not magic (I've recently had a situation where a wireless gadget worked better on Fedora than Ubuntu), it's got some nice features. It's sort-of based on Debian. http://www.ubuntu.org MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. You tell us: Does it matter? :) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
That way the list can continue to have discussions [...] with out having me bother everyone. :) The signal on this channel is Linux, so if you're talking Linux you're not bothering anyone because that's why we're all gathered here. Of course, you get extra credit for taking newbies and archive searchers into consideration when composing your questions and responses (and Subject: lines) so nobody has to wonder WTF you're talking about but, basically, bring it on! If something has stumped you after you've made an effort to handle it by normal means (like WWW searches, RTFM, etc) then chances are good that you're not the only one and the resultant discussion will be of value to others... ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Labitt, Bruce writes: I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. I'm familiar with FC6, due to a myth install (thanks Jarod, Ben et al) so I would not mind installing FC8. On my Fedora8 box I see: # yum search scientific | sort -u asymptote.i386 : Descriptive vector graphics language blitz.i386 : C++ class library for matrix scientific computing boinc-client.i386 : The BOINC client core dx.i386 : Open source version of IBM's Visualization Data Explorer galculator.i386 : GTK 2 based scientific calculator gcalctool.i386 : A desktop calculator gnuplot.i386 : A program for plotting mathematical expressions and data grads.i386 : Tool for easy acces, manipulation, and visualization of data gsl-devel.i386 : Static libraries and header files for GSL development gsl.i386 : The GNU Scientific Library for numerical analysis hdf5.i386 : A general purpose library and file format for storing scientific data hdf.i386 : A general purpose library and file format for storing scientific data kdeutils.i386 : K Desktop Environment - Utilities LabPlot.i386 : Data Analysis and Visualization latex2html.noarch : Converts LaTeX documents to HTML libctl.i386 : Guile-based support for flexible control files libscigraphica.i386 : A library of gtk+ widgets for SciGraphica Loading priorities plugin ncarg-devel.i386 : A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization ncarg.i386 : A Fortran and C based software package for scientific visualization nco.i386 : Suite of programs for manipulating NetCDF/HDF4 files netcdf.i386 : Libraries for the Unidata network Common Data Form (NetCDF v3) netcdf-perl.i386 : Perl extension module for scientific data access via the netCDF API openbabel.i386 : Chemistry software file format converter OpenSceneGraph.i386 : High performance real-time graphics toolkit orpie.i386 : A fullscreen console-based RPN calculator perl-Math-Pari.i386 : Perl interface to PARI perl-PDL.i386 : The Perl Data Language plotmm.i386 : GTKmm plot widget for scientific applications plotutils.i386 : GNU vector and raster graphics utilities and libraries plplot-gnome.i386 : Functions for scientific plotting with GNOME plplot.i386 : Library of functions for making scientific plots plplot-java.i386 : Functions for scientific plotting with Java plplot-octave.i386 : Functions for scientific plotting with Octave plplot-tk.i386 : Functions for scientific plotting with Tk plplot-wxGTK.i386 : Functions for scientific plotting with wxGTK pydot.noarch : Python interface to Graphviz's Dot language pygsl.i386 : GNU Scientific Library Interface for python q.i386 : Equational programming language ScientificPython-devel.i386 : The development files for ScientificPython ScientificPython-doc.i386 : Documentation and examples for ScientificPython ScientificPython.i386 : A collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing ScientificPython-qt.i386 : The Qt widgets from ScientificPython ScientificPython-tk.i386 : The tk widgets from ScientificPython scigraphica.i386 : Scientific application for data analysis and technical graphics scipy.i386 : Scipy: Scientific Tools for Python stix-fonts-integrals.noarch : STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional integral glyphs stix-fonts.noarch : STIX scientific and engineering fonts stix-fonts-pua.noarch : STIX scientific and engineering fonts, PUA glyphs stix-fonts-sizes.noarch : STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional glyph sizes stix-fonts-variants.noarch : STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional glyph variants TeXmacs.i386 : Structured wysiwyg scientific text editor veusz.i386 : GUI scientific plotting package Hey, as long as it has Fortran, it's a scientific machine, right? (-: Regards, --kevin -- GnuPG ID: B280F24EMeet me by the knuckles alumni.unh.edu!kdcof the skinny-bone tree. http://kdc-blog.blogspot.com/ -- Tom Waits ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
RE: New distro question
On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 13:24 -0400, Labitt, Bruce wrote: Umm, it is probably that I'm not used to it... ;) I find it awkward compared to either FC6 (gnome) or suse (kde). I can't put my finger on it yet. I didn't install it, so even now, after futzing about with it, I'm not quite sure what is on it, and where. The original owner doesn't care if I install something new on it. Somehow this copy of Centos feels older than FC6. If its CentOS 4 (or 3), then it *is* older than FC6. If its CentOS 5, its slightly newer than FC6 was at release time, but slightly older than FC6 when it went end-of-life. Just cat /etc/centos-release and/or look at uname -r to tell. (2.6.18-foo = centos 5, 2.6.9-foo = centos 4, 2.4.21-foo = centos 3, iirc) As for stable - what I really meant to say, is NOT bleeding edge. That is all. I'll check out scientific linux out of curiosity. Really only marginally different from CentOS of the same version level, both are rebuilds of RHEL, though Scientific does do a bit more customization for the (duh) scientific community. SL5 might be your best fit though. How sensitive is ubuntu to hardware? At home I couldn't install it on computer that I intended to run myth because it wouldn't recognize my hardware. What is the advantage of a debian based distro compared to rpm based? (Did I say that? Keep it civil. ) Hardware support depends more on the kernel and patches applied to it than it does what the packaging system is. Different distros have different policies on their kernels. * CentOS maintains the same kernel base for the entire release lifespan. Great for stability, but means a greater burden back-porting new hardware support. * Ubuntu follows the same general tack as CentOS, within a shorter lifespan. i.e., the upcoming Ubuntu release is going to have a 2.6.24.x kernel (iirc), and will for its entire lifespan, though they do back-port a fair amount of stuff. * Fedora's approach is to track the upstream kernel as closely as possible. For example, Fedora 9 will have a 2.6.25 kernel at release time, but will likely be up to at least 2.6.27 by the time it goes end-of-life. For all but the absolute newest hardware, the forthcoming Ubuntu and Fedora releases are probably about on par with their hardware support. CentOS/SL 5.1 lags behind a ways, and 5.2 will get closer, but will still lag behind a bit... -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 13:56 -0400, Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it awkward compared to either FC6 (gnome) ... That's curious. RHEL/CentOS and Fedora are typically very similar. They use all the same tools. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say they're built from the same sources I would. :) For a good portion of their pre-release development cycle, the RHEL5 and FC6 development trees were one in the same, the only difference being the config options the respective kernels were built with. Of course, they diverge from there once branched, but they actually *are* build from the same sources and hell, even some of the same binaries, for at least a while. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
List topic (was: New distro question)
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Michael ODonnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The signal on this channel is Linux ... I should probably take this opportunity to issue my occasional reminder that there is no charter or defined topic for this list. http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Www/MailingLists#General_Discussion_gnhlug_discus If the list membership wants to adopt a topic policy, that's fine, too. As list admin, I don't really care one way or the other. But people should be aware of this. I encourage anyone thinking of campaining to check the archives. Past attempts have failed to reach consensus. Personally (taking off my list admin hat), I prefer not to rehash the same discussions yet again if the end result will be the same no consensus. But then again also, repetition is the very soul of the net. Cheers! -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
RE: New distro question
Comments below: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Scott Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 1:56 PM To: Greater NH Linux User Group Subject: Re: New distro question On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it awkward compared to either FC6 (gnome) ... That's curious. RHEL/CentOS and Fedora are typically very similar. They use all the same tools. I wouldn't go quite so far as to say they're built from the same sources, but almost. they've got a *lot* in common. Somehow this copy of Centos feels older than FC6. [Labitt, Bruce] Version 4.5, so it is older than FC6! What version of CentOS? If you're not sure, check the contents of the /etc/redhat-release file. It might be as simple as upgrading to a newer CentOS release. According to Wikipedia, RHEL/CentOS 5 was derived from Fedora 6. RHEL 4 was derived from Fedora 3. It may also be the way your particular installation is configured. The computer you're using might not have the packages you're used to installed, or something along those lines. You might play around in yumex (GUI for yum) to see if there's anything missing for you. [Labitt, Bruce] I'll try that How sensitive is ubuntu to hardware? The same as any other distro or operating system: Completely. :-) Specifics tend to be, well, specific to the situation. Only way to know for sure is to try it out. What is the advantage of a debian based distro compared to rpm based? I dunno about advantage. They're a little different, but have more in common than apart. On one, you type rpm and yum, on the other, you use dpkg and apt-*. They put some config files in different places, and have slightly different file formats for a few things. Debian itself is known for having a very large repository of packages in the distribution itself, and for having a release cycle best described as glacial. But if you don't care about the age (or that works in your favor), the package selection is *very* nice. Ubuntu is/was derived from Debian. I think they've forked their own source tree, but I expect they share a lot of work. The Ubuntu repository is not as large as Debian, but it still has a bunch of stuff. They have a more frequent release cycle, but still put out long term support releases periodically, too. I've been impressed by their live CD and ease of use for novice users. But if you're having culture shock switching between Fedora and CentOS, I except Debian or Ubuntu would be worse. [Labitt, Bruce] Gee, I wouldn't characterize it like that! I guess it is because my version of Centos4.5 does predate FC6, hence it feels older. I have SuSE9.3 at home on two machines, yeah I know, ahem, time to upgrade. 9.3 doesn't seem old. As for mattering about MIS support, it usually ends up being helpful. It is useful to have local support, I've got to admit. You may want to see if you can get CentOS to work first, then. [Labitt, Bruce] Is a Centos upgrade as ugly as a SuSE upgrade? In other words, save \usr, \home, install over everything? That way the list can continue to have discussions about relevant and irrelevant topics with out having me bother everyone. :) This isn't a bother. And it's rather more on-topic than usual. :) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Labitt, Bruce wrote: I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. I'm familiar with FC6, due to a myth install (thanks Jarod, Ben et al) so I would not mind installing FC8. I'm not interested in FC9 only due to the fact that it hasn't been released yet, and I want something relatively stable. I have downloaded FC8 and opensuse10.3. Any others I should consider? I'm helping a department of mathematicians here with 50% of them using either Debian or Ubuntu (the other half uses OS X). Their experience and computer-savvy'ness differs wildly, but most of them are quite happy with their desktops. Some run stable versions, some prefer Debian 'unstable' or Ubuntu's release of the day, be it 'alpha' or 'beta'... In case of Debian, unstable is quite stable actually and the software is pretty much recent. Ubuntu takes the 'unstable' from the name, adds some desktop conveniences and perhaps some stability. As far as gnuplot install, Debian/Ubuntu package management brings in all the dependencies, of course. 'apt-get install gnuplot'. If you want, you can build packages from Deb/Ubuntu source using standard Debian utilities *and* your custom compiler optimizations, for example, 'apt-build install gnuplot'. apt-build is configurable to take into account your custom settings and pass them to make/gcc. Of course you can still always do 'configure make make install' from whatever source you prefer. 'Scientific' is a wide area and you may have to check Debian/Ubuntu repositories for software that you need. Commercial Mathematica/Maple/Matlab also run well on both x86 and amd64 Debians/Ubuntus. We are mostly Dell shop here, with some IBM and custom-built machines thrown in. I still have to run into something that wasn't supported by Ubuntu. Kind regards, Šarūnas Burdulis Sysadmin, Mathematics at Dartmouth -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH+795VVkpJ1MUn+YRAnasAJwJewseo+XP9UG0vV/4RlXeYYPS6QCfaacm nBoq5DERW3xIEpq1WwYLyQ0= =wNGO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Šarūnas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In case of Debian, unstable is quite stable actually ... Last time I used it (about 14 months ago), Debian unstable had package churn on the order of tens or hundreds of megabytes per week. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Labitt, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Labitt, Bruce] Is a Centos upgrade as ugly as a SuSE upgrade? In other words, save \usr, \home, install over everything? Every kind of head-wear Linux I've ever used has been able to upgrade previous versions in-place. I think the latest RHEL can still, in theory, recognize and upgrade a Red Hat Linux 2.0 installation. Of course, I wouldn't expect *that* to go so well, in practice. 12 years is a lot of software rot. But you should certainly be able to upgrade CentOS 4.x to 5.x with minimal heartache, assuming your configuration is reasonable vanilla. Just boot the installer disc and it should find your installation and ask you if you'd like to upgrade. I'd still make a backup of everything. :) Things sometimes go wrong -- that's a universal rule. And if an OS upgrade goes wrong, it generally leaves the system unusable. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Labitt, Bruce wrote: I realize this is / was / will be a religious argument, but I'm having trouble with this distribution of Centos on my computer. Please refer to all comments as in my opinion to avoid jihads. I was wondering if there was a distro more up to date and was suited for scientific calculations. I'm familiar with FC6, due to a myth install (thanks Jarod, Ben et al) so I would not mind installing FC8. I'm not interested in FC9 only due to the fact that it hasn't been released yet, and I want something relatively stable. I have downloaded FC8 and opensuse10.3. Any others I should consider? I am running fc7 on latops desktops and servers at home. The only problem I have is evolution-alarm-notify which crashes when launched from the session. bugs logged all over the net on this one and it's not fedora specific. oh - and my pp port scanner hasn't worked since fc4. I haven't tried fc8 yet. the livna repo has all the multimedia stuff not included with distro. I also work with Debian etch *release* on a daily basis which is quite stable and security patched often. Multimedia licensing is strictly area 51 for this distro so be prepared to use another apt repo or compile from source which get's away from the release. Ubuntu is very nice - even cool. Stable and very easy to install. ie on laptops ;) I haven't gotten into the multimedia aspect of this one. I mention the multimedia aspect because it's not a trivial task to build everything without a repo if you want to burn mp3's, transcode or do anything with dvd's, but then again you've gotten mythtv up and running (bless the diety of your choice) so you're no stranger to this. Here's the list of everything I've had to compile using fc7: ivtv ndiswrapper don't get me started on the state if the native driver for my ancient (4 year old *gasp*) wireless card. the blacklist keeps getting longer... again this isn't distro specific. I wasn't impressed with suse 10 when I tried it out. mostly because I'm not a kde kind of guy and don't want to jump through a hundred hoops that are on fire to get back to my familiar gnome world. The snake and tiger pit was enough to deter me at the time and I haven't found a compelling reason to go back and try again. It doesn't have to be cool, although that is ok. It does have to be functional and reasonably supportable. MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. My 2 cents. TIA Bruce ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. -- Ben yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
Frank DiPrete wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. -- Ben yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. Does Centos keep up with security updates? ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
To simplify scientist self-administration of the workstation, consider WebMin it's UserMin module. See April Linux Journal review. scientific calculations. What kind of science? Bio/Genetic, Geo/Soc/Stat, HPC MPPC ? If Clustering, / Hi-Performance Computing, that's a whole different kettle of fish. BioGenetic: http://www.mybio.net/biowiki/Computational_biology lists several. Geo: ArchLinux (Archeology), GIS Knoppix, see http://www.opensourcegis.org/ Quantian is Knoppix/Debian Live packaging of lots of scientific calculation goodness. [ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=Quantian ] See also GNU/Linux in Science and Engineering FAQ at http://www.comsoc.org/vancouver/scieng.html http://live.gnome.org/GnomeScienceCD uses AutoPackage to install to any distro Website has links to many other Linux for Sciences projects too. functional and reasonably supportable. MIS is familiar with RH stuff, if that matters. Scientific Linux suits RH-similarity Your MIS should be able to fit Scientific Linux into their RH BootStrap system. A number of others might be RH/Centos/Fedora derived, see http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=independence to see who is based on whom (but hasn't been updated for Ubuntu variants yet?). Or just use the Gnome Science CD with MIS's RH desktop ? If you want Ubuntu cool-ness, Scibuntu is the Ubu answer to Science Linux (from the RH/Fedora camp). -- Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 21:40 -0400, Bruce Labitt wrote: Frank DiPrete wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. -- Ben yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. Does Centos keep up with security updates? Yes. The CentOS folks are pretty good about building and pushing security updates within a rather short window after Red Hat releases them. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 20:50 -0400, Frank DiPrete wrote: Ben Scott wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Frank DiPrete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MIS would be just as comfy with fedora as with RH. From a support and admin point of view it's pretty much the same. Speaking as a professional MIS weenie, I can say that the main thing that annoys about Fedora is their release cycle. Having to do a major upgrade to my OS every year, or living without security updates, isn't a choice I relish. yes, the release cycle for fedora is a bit fierce. But that's the fun part. :) At least, as a kernel monkey at Red Hat, doing devel work on Fedora is a lot more fun than doing it on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. RHEL just gets stale and boring too fast. Back-porting drivers and bug fixes to an ancient kernel isn't the most exciting thing. Working with the latest upstream kernel is a ton more fun. I run Fedora on all my own systems, as well as on most of the systems I have in the office (and most of them are rawhide). In fact, I'm running rawhide on the laptop I'm typing on right now. Though I do usually wait to upgrade from the prior release to rawhide on my laptop for a while after release, as the month or two right after a release is when rawhide is the least unstable... But once rawhide hits beta, its pretty solid -- like someone said about debian unstable, its rarely in such a bad state its not useable. Well, at least from a developer's standpoint. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: New distro question
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Bruce Labitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does Centos keep up with security updates? CentOS tracks RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) very closely. Red Hat provides updates for seven years after initial release. So RHEL 2.1, released in 2002, and roughly contemporary with Fedora version negative three[1], should be approaching end-of-life next year -- a few months after Fedora 8 is EOL'ed. [1] What we call Fedora used to be known as Red Hat Linux. RHL officially ended with version 9. So call RHL 9 Fedora 0. Continuing further back, RHL 7.2 was being developed around the same time as RHEL 2.1. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
