On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 6:22 PM Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:00:00PM +0100, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 May 2021, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
> >
> > >- first slide of "distribution landscape" is nonsense,
> > >with everybody stuck with el7 for another 3
On 5/5/21 5:21 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:00:00PM +0100, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2021, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
[snip]
(OK, C++20 support in g++ 10.2.1 is "experimental).
And so what?
I can take SL-6 and graft modern versions of all
What you describe -- replacing a distro's utilities by those from other
than the distro -- is done in practice for *SOME* things, as most on
this list do. However, under no condition should this be called a
stable distro, let alone an "enterprise hardened stable" distro, without
the amount of
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:00:00PM +0100, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
> On Tue, 4 May 2021, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
>
> >- first slide of "distribution landscape" is nonsense,
> >with everybody stuck with el7 for another 3 years and
> >bye, bye, c++14, c++17, c++20.
>
> Is Red Hat Developer
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 10:57:11AM +, Jose Marques wrote:
>
> My view is that Stream is exactly what RHEL say it is, a development
> distribution to which 3rd parties can contribute to RHEL development and from
> which 3rd parties can base their own distributions. It's not for end users,
>
First off, IBM, the big company, has nothing to do with any of Red Hat
development. We (Red Hat) are a completely separate company whose profits
go to IBM. We have a completely separate legal staff, health care,
management, engineers, policies, everything. So, quit saying that we (Red
Hat) get
On Tue, 4 May 2021, Yasha Karant wrote:
I fully concur -- a clear statement of a concern about the source and any
authentication/pay-walls limiting access to that source. I assume that the
official rebuilders other than SL have paid the necessary fees to download
the real, actual, production
You stated:
all sorts of tests that we can't do in
public, and make tweaks and changes that we can't do in public. This is
mainly due to hardware NDA's, and security stuff.
End excerpt.
1. Are these NDA enabled tweaks, changes, and tests that are in the
production releases of IBM RH EL
On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 10:01 AM Yasha Karant wrote:
> If I correctly have read the RH EL9 CentOS announcement below, EL 9
> will be in production before the end of this year, leapfrogging EL 8 as
> it were.
>
I just want to clean up one point, because it seems you mis-understood the
If I understand your (Leon) interpretation of the IBM RH EULA, those who
*START* from the actual, official, IBM RH source used for IBM RH EL, not
that which is released currently as CentOS, violates that EULA. Before
CentOS became part of RH, later IBM RH, ("became part" is a WTO legal
On 5/4/21 3:38 PM, James M. Pulver wrote:
Maybe the AlmaLinux reddit (might also be one for Rocky?
Both Alma and Rocky have fairly active reddits.
On 05.05.21 01:11, Mark Rousell wrote:
On 04/05/2021 23:41, Leon Fauster wrote:
The source are at
On 05/05/2021 00:38, Yasha Karant wrote:
> I have not attempted to get a "dev" IBM RH license that supposedly is
> at no cost -- has anyone done so and down a full buildable source
> download?
Just go here to create a free dev account (which allows up to 16 RHEL
instances and, of course, access
I fully concur -- a clear statement of a concern about the source and
any authentication/pay-walls limiting access to that source. I assume
that the official rebuilders other than SL have paid the necessary fees
to download the real, actual, production IBM RH EL buildable source as
referenced
On 04/05/2021 23:41, Leon Fauster wrote:
> The source are at
>
On 05.05.21 00:10, Mark Rousell wrote:
On 04/05/2021 21:42, Yasha Karant wrote:
Your statement at the end indicates that I have missed a source
distribution channel.
Sorry, which statement is that?
Just for the avoidance of doubt, my comment about "Discourse" was a
reference to the
On 04/05/2021 21:42, Yasha Karant wrote:
> Your statement at the end indicates that I have missed a source
> distribution channel.
Sorry, which statement is that?
Just for the avoidance of doubt, my comment about "Discourse" was a
reference to the Discourse software
On Tue, 4 May 2021, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
- first slide of "distribution landscape" is nonsense,
with everybody stuck with el7 for another 3 years and
bye, bye, c++14, c++17, c++20.
Is Red Hat Developer Toolset 10
On 5/4/21 3:42 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
You state that there will not be a CentOS 9 and only a CentOS Stream
perpetual alpha or beta channel. I thought that IBM RH would not
directly release buildable production EL source, but would channel it
under a CentOS moniker. CentOS Stream is *NOT*
Your statement at the end indicates that I have missed a source
distribution channel. The discourse concerning the ergonomics of a list
such as this versus an eyecandy "Ask Ubuntu" (with character count
limitations on the length of postings) approach is worthwhile, but
perhaps at a later time
On 04/05/2021 18:01, Yasha Karant wrote:
> then one is forced to either Rocky or AlmaLinux, assuming either
> pushes out an EL 9 clone as soon as CentOS or other IBM RH buildable
> source is released.
Well, we know there's not going to be a CentOS 9. There will obviously
be a CentOS Stream 9 but,
-users
Subject: Re: [SL-Users] Re: any update on CERN Linux and CentOS-8 situation?
If I correctly have read the IBH RH EL9 CentOS announcement below, EL 9
will be in production before the end of this year, leapfrogging EL 8 as
it were. I wonder how much of this is due to the various issues with EL
Thanks Konstantin for all of this great information.
I'll second the recommendation to watch Troy's video.
It makes me feel a bit more comfortable that Alma/Rocky will be able to
deliver the 10 years of updates.
I still have a sour taste for this new "module" packaging scheme. It
seems to
On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:14:11PM +, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> Here's a presentation at HEPiX'21 from CERN that's publicly available:
> https://indico.cern.ch/event/995485/contributions/4256466/
Thank you for the link, I was not aware of this presentation.
For further reading, it contains a
If I correctly have read the IBH RH EL9 CentOS announcement below, EL 9
will be in production before the end of this year, leapfrogging EL 8 as
it were. I wonder how much of this is due to the various issues with EL
8? As SL 8 is not happening, SL 9 certainly is not -- forcing one to
choose
On 04.05.21 17:41, Dave Dykstra wrote:
Yasha,
I'll try to answer as I understand things as an observer.
On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 02:51:30PM -0700, Yasha Karant wrote:
...
1. Fermilab and the non-CERN HEP community are not part of the Linux Future
Community analysis as far as I can read, but
Yasha,
I'll try to answer as I understand things as an observer.
On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 02:51:30PM -0700, Yasha Karant wrote:
...
> 1. Fermilab and the non-CERN HEP community are not part of the Linux Future
> Community analysis as far as I can read, but are consulted later after the
>
nux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: [SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS] [SL-Users] Re: any update on CERN Linux
and CentOS-8 situation?
When the Centos 8 news came out, I tried out Centos Stream against our
configuration. Kickstart and Puppet config needed very little change and I was
able to bring up a VM in our lab
When the Centos 8 news came out, I tried out Centos Stream against our
configuration. Kickstart and Puppet config needed very little change and I was
able to bring up a VM in our lab config quite easily.
I have two observations:
1) Updates are sparse, none for ages then a large batch of
Excerpts from the presentation referenced by Dave Dykstra are appended.
There are multiple questions one may raise by reading the presentation;
below are my initial questions.
1. Fermilab and the non-CERN HEP community are not part of the Linux
Future Community analysis as far as I can read,
Here's a presentation at HEPiX'21 from CERN that's publicly available:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/995485/contributions/4256466/
My summary was much more succinct than the presentation and is partly my
own interpretation. The presentation lists a whole bunch of options and
basically says
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 09:35:02PM +, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> Both Fermilab and CERN have stated that they plan to use CentOS 8 stream
> for now (or Scientific Linux 7 or CentOS 7) and will evaluate later
> whether or not to switch to one of the clones.
Can you please provide a citation for
32 matches
Mail list logo
