On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Ted Creedon <[email protected]> wrote:
> EG OSX has a memory leak that requires weekly rebooting (per apple support) > > > Details? Cuz uh, I'm not rebooting weekly and... > On Sunday, June 21, 2015, Harald Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > I do not believe that the OpenAFS mailing lists are an appropriate forum >> > to discuss AuriStor. My response to Michael provided details on >> > AuriStor because I felt it was necessary in order to properly answer the >> > implied questions. >> >> What I've learned so far from AuriStor it looks like it could be a >> replacement for OpenAFS on the platforms it's available. And it can >> more as Jeff tells us. If that strategy is good advertising depends >> on "cultural background". >> >> > The question of "supported platforms" is an interesting one because it >> > is very unclear what it means for OpenAFS to "support" a platform. What >> > are the criteria? Is it sufficient to say that if you can build OpenAFS >> > on the OS and hardware architecture that it is "supported"? >> >> Sorry, "supported" was probably a bad choice of word. But I don't know >> if "availabe" or "runable" or "it builds it ships" would be better. >> >> > I am quite sure there are other criteria that could be added to the mix. >> >> I know that you take "supported" very seriously. I would be happy if >> other software vendors (which are not into file systems) would do that >> as well. >> >> > * Linux >> > . Red Hat Enterprise Linux >> > (YFSI is a Red Hat Technology Partner) >> > . Fedora >> > . Debian >> > . Ubuntu >> > * Microsoft Windows >> > * Apple OSX and iOS >> > * Oracle Solaris >> > * IBM AIX >> > * Android >> > >> > Servers are supported everywhere but on Windows, iOS and Android but the >> > performance varies significantly based upon the OS release, processor >> > architecture, and underlying hardware so there are combinations that we >> > recommend and those we do not. >> > >> > The failure to list an OS family or Linux distribution does not imply >> > that YFSI will not support AuriStor on that platform. It only implies >> > that there has been insufficient customer interest to this point for >> > YFSI to expend the necessary resources on development, testing and >> > certification (where applicable.) >> >> Thanks for the list. I guess on "the main HW" which is amd64 for most >> of the OSes above. Both at work and privately I run OpenAFS on >> platforms that are not on the list and even in the future will not >> have much "customer interest". >> >> > In the end software development has to be a partnership between those >> > that build and those that deploy. If those that deploy do not fund >> > those that build there will not be sufficient development hours and >> > talent to build the solutions those that deploy require. >> >> I see that this partnership has stopped working in many places. It >> makes me sad. >> >> > P.S. My apologies for the long reply. >> >> You don't need to apologise. >> >> Harald. >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenAFS-info mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info >> > -- D
