+1
On 2/22/20 5:41 PM, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
I'm an independent electronics inventor, heavily dependent
on both competent software and competent laboratory science,
both for the knowledge I depend on and the tools I use to
transform that knowledge into products and services for
my customers.
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 12:41:13AM -0600, Eremey Valetov wrote:
>
> 1.I think that it is very likely that CentOS or a similar Linux
> distribution will be available in the long-term ...
> 2.It makes sense for a scientific distribution based on CentOS or similar
> to be maintained.
>
I find it extremely puzzling that you can express so much fear about IBM
and then even consider moving into the arms of Oracle!
I used Scientific Linux for about 10 years and it was fantastic. Close
to 4 years ago I moved to a new place which uses CentOS instead. It also
works just fine,
On 22/02/2020 23:41, Keith Lofstrom wrote:
As a community of scientific, like-minded Linux users,
let's begin to prepare a rudimentary plan B, and hope
that we never need to implement it.
Well, the CentOS mail list is at
...@listserv.fnal.gov
On Behalf Of Yasha Karant
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2020 0:24
To: scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Is Scientfic Linux Still Active as a Distribution?
>From below:
Will look forward to move to another distribution.
End excerpt.
The question is: which distro?
From below:
Will look forward to move to another distribution.
End excerpt.
The question is: which distro? My first hope was Oracle EL 8 -- given
that Oracle has to compete with IBM and thus, unlike CentOS that may or
may not fit into the profit/business long term plan of IBM (long term --
Hello there,
I'm quite sad about SL EoL.
I'm no scientist, just an electronics guy who do a lot of research in RF
(as hobby, mostly testing antennas for ham radio in VHF bands) from
Argentina.
Fot SL the most "well done" linux distribution, for people who simply knows.
Will look forward to
On 22/02/2020 02:15, Yasha Karant wrote:
Two comments.
I am not pursuing the IBM FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt)
[...]
For the avoidance of doubt, I do not think you are pursuing FUD about IBM. I
was not the person who accused you of that. Indeed, I think you are being
sensibly cautious.
I
Two comments.
I am not pursuing the IBM FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) marketing and
business strategy that made IBM the dominant business, accounting, and
the like, computer systems service, software, and hardware supplier in
the USA for many years.
The research and scientific market was
Andrew Z wrote on 2/21/20 1:57 PM:
> It is odd that you have no budget to support critical systems for your
> department, Yasha.
>
> What if you power servers down and see how "critical " they indeed are? And if
> they are not - then get fedora and be done with it.
I don't think Yasha said that
On 21/02/2020 19:21, Yasha Karant wrote:
In the simplest terms. I trust IBM to maximize overall return-on-investment
(e.g., profit), and a "free" CentOS that truly competes with licensed-for-fee
products does not fit that for-profit model.
Whilst I don't disagree that one should be cautious, it
Thats why we r losing to china..
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, 16:17 P. Larry Nelson wrote:
> Not at all odd in academia. On the contrary, it is the norm.
>
>
> Andrew Z wrote on 2/21/20 1:57 PM:
> > It is odd that you have no budget to support critical systems for your
> > department, Yasha.
> >
> >
Not at all odd in academia. On the contrary, it is the norm.
Andrew Z wrote on 2/21/20 1:57 PM:
It is odd that you have no budget to support critical systems for your
department, Yasha.
What if you power servers down and see how "critical " they indeed are? And if
they are not - then get
-
> *From:* owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov <
> owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov> on behalf of Yasha Karant
>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 21, 2020 13:21
> *To:* SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@fnal.gov
> *Subject:* Re: Is Scientfic Linux Still Active as a
IFIC-LINUX-USERS@fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Is Scientfic Linux Still Active as a Distribution?
Caution: EXTERNAL email
As we could not afford the license-for-fee model that RedHat started a number
of years ago (prior to which, one could download and install production RedHat
-- not the "Fed
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 1:21 PM Yasha Karant wrote:
> In the simplest terms. I trust IBM to maximize overall
> return-on-investment (e.g., profit), and a "free" CentOS that truly
> competes with licensed-for-fee products does not fit that for-profit model.
>
The amount of anti-IBM FUD in these
As we could not afford the license-for-fee model that RedHat started a
number of years ago (prior to which, one could download and install
production RedHat -- not the "Fedora" equivalent -- licensed for free
but without RedHat support -- but updates, etc., were available without
fee), we too
Hello there,
I'm quite sad about SL EoL.
I'm no scientist, just an electronics guy who do a lot of research in RF
(as hobby, mostly testing antennas for ham radio in VHF bands) from
Argentina.
Fot SL the most "well done" linux distribution, for people who simply knows.
Will look forward to
Hello,
I can't say I'm negative toward CentOS, I used it back in the late 90s (? Maybe
early 00s), as an alternative to RedHat at that time.
It's more a familiarity thing. I have used more Debian based Linux distros
since the mid 1990s than anything else.
I will certainly look into CentOS as
Hi,
I'm surprised by the so negative feeling against CentOS which is a great
project too and has been working well since it was "acquired" by Red
Hat. I see no official sign that it should change. Moving from SL to
CentOS is straightforward, I don't think you can speak about it as a
Hello,
Thanks to everyone for clarifying the future status of SL.
I guess it's time to start researching he docs for Ubuntu/Debian or something.
Looks like we need to revise our computing cluster plan.
The computer here is pretty small with only two nodes and a controller
totalling 112 CPUs.
Hello Peter,
> Is Scientific Linux still active?
Scientific Linux 6 and 7 will be supported until they are EOL, but there will
be no SL8.
Here is the official announcement from last April:
https://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1904=SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS=817
Bonnie King
I used the term "dead". SL7 (and earlier?) is still active. By dead, I
did not mean SL 7, I meant SL in general for the future. As I
understand the situation, Fermilab/CERN (and thus the HEP community upon
which many of us are "piggybacking" -- not freeloading if one is paying
taxes to a
23 matches
Mail list logo
