We have an installation on LPAR1. The guest boot on SAN Disk with SLES11 SP1.
An Disk Mirroring is active to a Second
SAN Subsystem. Now we will try to start an guest on de 2nd LPAR with the Mirror
Disk.
Last week we make an similar installation with RHEL6. We must modify different
Config-File
This monitoring command is normally shipped with DB2. We have DB2 9.5.3
but I can't find it anywhere.
Does anybody have an idea if it's also available for linux for z-series?
Can it be downloaded anywhere?
best regards,
Samir Reddahi
System Engineer | Systeem MF, AS400, DBA Operations
T +32 9
Samir,
on version 9.5 for z/linux has this bug... :) i copy from old version ;)
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Samir Reddahi samir.redd...@securex.bewrote:
This monitoring command is normally shipped with DB2. We have DB2 9.5.3 but
I can't find it anywhere.
Does anybody have an idea if
On 1/26/2011 at 03:23 AM, Richard Heimo richard.he...@swisscom.com wrote:
Have anyone experience which modifications are necessary for SLES11 SP1?
You should be able to get away with modifying /etc/multipath.conf (to maintain
the human friendly names), and the udev rules in
This leads me to a question that I'm mildly interested in.
If it took so long for Fedora to have a 64 bit favor, why would anyone use it?
Is there a different market for Fedora on the mainframe than for Redhat or Suse?
What does Fedora do that can't be done with Redhat or Suse which gets timely
If it took so long for Fedora to have a 64 bit favor, why would anyone
use it?
The short version: to deal with two things: 1) a need for a less conservative
package adoption strategy (Fedora is usually a year to two years ahead of RHEL,
by design), and 2) name recognition. The Linux on Intel
For those interested:
| If it took so long for Fedora to have a 64 bit favor, why would anyone use it?
Fedora supported s390x on Fedora 11, but not on 12 or 13.[1] The difference is
the Fedora is free.
| Is there a different market for Fedora on the mainframe than for Redhat or
Suse?
I
The install process went well. I opted for the basic install and was then going
to install things via yum. However, when I do I get:
[root@fedora ~]# yum install gcc xmlto git cmake
updates/metalink
|
This may relate to the issue;
From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/s390x
After installation the yum repo doesn't point at our mash tree. Simply do
the following to fix that:
echo '[fedora]
name=Fedora $releasever - $basearch
Neale Ferguson píše v St 26. 01. 2011 v 15:49 -0600:
The install process went well. I opted for the basic install and was then
going to install things via yum. However, when I do I get:
[root@fedora ~]# yum install gcc xmlto git cmake
updates/metalink
The fedora.repo appears okay, it's the fedora-updates.repo that's the problem.
If I rename the latter everyone is happy (including
fedora-updates-testing.repo).
On 1/26/11 5:37 PM, Sterling James ssja...@dstsystems.com wrote:
[fedora]
name=Fedora $releasever - $basearch
On 01/26/2011 09:23 AM, Richard Heimo wrote:
Last week we make an similar installation with RHEL6. We must modify different
Config-File
Add FCP oft he 2nd System in /etc/zipl.conf
rd_ZFCP=0.0.0301,0x50060e801525ab47,0x0005
rd_ZFCP=0.0.0302,0x50060e801525ab57,0x0005
Great, tks.
On 1/26/11 5:42 PM, Dan Horák dho...@redhat.com wrote:
Neale Ferguson píše v St 26. 01. 2011 v 15:49 -0600:
The install process went well. I opted for the basic install and was then
going to install things via yum. However, when I do I get:
[root@fedora ~]# yum install gcc
On 01/26/2011 05:59 PM, Frederick, Michael wrote:
For those interested:
| If it took so long for Fedora to have a 64 bit favor, why would anyone use it?
Fedora supported s390x on Fedora 11, but not on 12 or 13.[1]
Just one little nit pick: F11 on s390x was a repo of rpm packages only,
i.e.
14 matches
Mail list logo
