Re: Should we skip foss/2018a (Re: [easybuild] 2018a toolchains)

2017-12-08 Thread Ole Holm Nielsen
On 12/08/2017 12:39 PM, Alvarez, Damian wrote: +1 for going for 18.1. But the glibc issues (not kernel issues) have been solved already (https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:3296). This package should find its way into CentOS 7.4 real quick (maybe it is already there, I am not sure).

Should we skip foss/2018a (Re: [easybuild] 2018a toolchains)

2017-12-08 Thread Joachim Hein
Hi, Reading through Kenneth’ reply, I am honestly wondering whether we should skip a foss/2018a. The below does not suggest any big upgrade. Considering the human cost of moving all "helper” packages (such as HDF5, netcdf, Python and Pythonwrapers, Boost) that our users require, I am close

Re: Should we skip foss/2018a (Re: [easybuild] 2018a toolchains)

2017-12-08 Thread Alvarez, Damian
+1 for going for 18.1. But the glibc issues (not kernel issues) have been solved already (https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:3296). This package should find its way into CentOS 7.4 real quick (maybe it is already there, I am not sure). Damian On 08/12/17 10:35,