[U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Dawn Wolthuis
We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn
-- 
Dawn M. Wolthuis

Take and give some delight today
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Larry Hiscock
We use CentOS for our Linux web servers, and for most of our customers.

CentOS is RHEL.  It's compiled from the RedHat sources, which are freely
available.  The only changes the CentOS team makes is the logos.  If it will
run on RHEL, it will run on CentOS.

Larry Hiscock
Western Computer Services


-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 6:42 AM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn
--
Dawn M. Wolthuis

Take and give some delight today
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread dale kelley

Larry knows more than me!

Dale
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Perry Taylor
The only concern I might have is if you have to bring Rocket in for support... 
will they support it.

Perry

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:42 AM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn
-- 
Dawn M. Wolthuis

Take and give some delight today
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any 
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) 
and may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is 
prohibited. ZirMed, Inc. has strict policies regarding the 
content of e-mail communications, specifically Protected Health 
Information, any communications containing such material will 
be returned to the originating party with such advisement 
noted. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact 
the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the 
original message.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread dale kelley

Dawn,

You could easily spend more on your var's efforts than the RHEL 6 and 
have no assurance of success.


Dale

On 07/17/2013 08:41 AM, Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Robert Porter

The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly 
behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources 
have to be released before work can start. How long?  It can be significant... 
RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010.  CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011  - 8 months 
to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be 
aware of when your trying to decide.  Personally, I love CentOS and run it on 
many machines. 
 
 
 
 
Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java
Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst
Laboratory Information Services
Ochsner Health System
 
 
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential 
information, privileged material (including material protected by the 
solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public 
information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended 
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, 
please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your 
system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission 
by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel McGrath
While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is 
always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment 
difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely 
support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is 
currently 32-bit. 

CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a 
reported issue on a supported platform. 

As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes 
hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, 
we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not. 

Regards,
Dan

On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote:

 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
 supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
 the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
 changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
 much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
 willing to play along?
 
 Thanks.  --dawn
 -- 
 Dawn M. Wolthuis
 
 Take and give some delight today
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread doug chanco
I have been personally using universe on CentOS since version 5.1 (of 
CentOS) with ZERO issues, now granted I am using this personally with 
the personal edition of universe, the one issue you would have would be 
byte ordering (easily fixable) if coming from windows but you would have 
that with any flavor of linux/unix.


so in my using universe with CentOS over the last 5 years or so (in a 
personal setting) I have had zero problems


dougc

On 7/17/2013 9:41 AM, Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Wjhonson
I read this as stable version
So that's a good thing :)
You don't want to be their beta tester

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Robert Porter ropor...@ochsner.org
To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 7:32 am
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?



The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be slightly 
behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. Those sources 
have to be released before work can start. How long?  It can be significant... 
RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010.  CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 2011  - 8 months 
to 
the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - just something to be 
aware of when your trying to decide.  Personally, I love CentOS and run it on 
many machines. 
 
 
 
 
Robert F. Porter, MCSE, CCNA, ZCE, OCP-Java
Lead Sr. Programmer / Analyst
Laboratory Information Services
Ochsner Health System
 
 
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential 
information, privileged material (including material protected by the 
solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public 
information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended 
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, 
please 
immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. 
Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by 
unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.

 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Bill Haskett
Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 
R2?  ...and you actually get paid?  :-)


Bill


- Original Message -
*From:* dw...@tincat-group.com
*To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
*Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM
*Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe?

We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Wols Lists
On 17/07/13 15:31, Robert Porter wrote:
 The only effective difference is that CentOS is that it will always be 
 slightly behind RHEL. This is because it is re-compiled from RHEL sources. 
 Those sources have to be released before work can start. How long?  It can be 
 significant... RHEL 6.0 released Nov 10, 2010.  CentOS 6.0 release July 10, 
 2011  - 8 months to the day.This may or may not be a problem for you - 
 just something to be aware of when your trying to decide.  Personally, I love 
 CentOS and run it on many machines. 

Another possibility is Scientific Linux - also an RHEL clone.

But do you have any RHEL boxes on which you pay support? Because if you
do, what's the problem with adding another? And if you don't why don't
you run RHEL anyway?

I would let the VAR load RHEL. The only problem with doing that is the
terms of RH's support contract - and if you don't have one then that's
your lookout. If you take out a support contract the terms are you pay
support for ALL your machines running RHEL. You can't install four
copies and only pay for two. But there's nothing to stop you installing
a hundred copies and paying for none.

I know - this Free Software paradigm can be a bit difficult to
understand sometimes :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Tony Gravagno
 From: Dawn Wolthuis 
 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their
 application on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay
 for RHEL 6. I searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does
anyone
 have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully
run
 Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for
 ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along?

Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone:
1) Should be exactly the same.
2) Might not be.
3) There is risk involved.

Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its
own errors from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get
them fixed - just visit the CentOS forum and see what people are
talking about. That's the gamble we take for freeware. (It's only
free if your time is worthless.)

How much does RHEL Support help? Well, many systems I know never even
update their RHEL systems. They install and then don't want to patch
because it might mess up dependencies, forcing a reinstall. And RedHat
does the same themselves to an extent - they guarantee that their
distro isn't volatile like Fedora - in part because they don't provide
many updates to common FOSS after production. As an example, you need
an update to something like cURL (v7.19 from the current RHEL6 yum
update but v7.31 in real world) you'll have to get it from somewhere
other than RedHat, and that could break a lot of stuff. And because
they bashed Windows for so many years about this (DLL HELL) before
drinking the Linux Kool-Aid, these folks are afraid to say Linux has
exactly the same problems, or afraid to admit they don't update their
system, or maybe they just don't know that their packages are a couple
years old and unpatched. (No need for people to jump in to reassure us
that you update your personal system(s) - trading anecdotes doesn't
change the fact that other people do things differently.)

But the real point here ... is that once U2 is working, and it
should out of the box, then it shouldn't break, as long as you
don't change anything. It's been around since 2010 and CentOS is right
there with it now. The only time you could have issues is when U2 is
certified over a new RH release and CentOS hasn't caught up to them
yet. The cost for not being with a current RHEL release is that you
won't be able to install a brand new OS/DBMS combo with confidence,
you'll just have to wait a while for the dust to settle. Now, what if
you do get that brand new release of RH/UV and it breaks. You need to
wait for Rocket to work with RH anyway. So if you're going to wait
there anyway, why not just wait a little longer and get it all free?

You asked how much pain would we be introducing ... all we can tell
is how much pain you could or might, not would. The odds are in
your favor - chances are very slim that there will be an issue in RHEL
that affects U2, that it will get fixed by RH but not passed on in
CentOS. There's just a time delay - you'd be paying RedHat to get
changes to you faster, that's all, but you'll eventually get the same
changes from CentOS.

HTH
T 

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Dawn Wolthuis
Hi Bill -- Ah, this time I'm in the client seat, desiring a hosted solution
for Universe. We will choose the same box for starters for the web server
as well. The VAR runs IIS on Windows, but Apache on linux. Given that info,
which OS would you select for Universe 11.1?   --dawn


On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bill Haskett wphask...@advantos.netwrote:

 Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 R2?
  ...and you actually get paid?  :-)

 Bill

 --**--**
 
 - Original Message -
 *From:* dw...@tincat-group.com
 *To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 *Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM
 *Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe?

  We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a
 supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
 the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
 changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
 much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
 willing to play along?

 Thanks.  --dawn


 __**_
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users




-- 
Dawn M. Wolthuis

Take and give some delight today
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel McGrath
In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL 
isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system 
configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you 
are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development 
or support, then it is probably less of an issue.

If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story.

Dan McGrath
Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab
Rocket Software
4600 South Ulster Street  ·  Suite 1100  ·   Denver, CO 80237 ·  USA
T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com




-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

 From: Dawn Wolthuis
 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application 
 on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I 
 searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does
anyone
 have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully
run
 Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for 
 ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along?

Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone:
1) Should be exactly the same.
2) Might not be.
3) There is risk involved.

Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its own errors 
from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get them fixed - just 
visit the CentOS forum and see what people are talking about. That's the gamble 
we take for freeware. (It's only free if your time is worthless.)

How much does RHEL Support help? Well, many systems I know never even update 
their RHEL systems. They install and then don't want to patch because it might 
mess up dependencies, forcing a reinstall. And RedHat does the same themselves 
to an extent - they guarantee that their distro isn't volatile like Fedora - in 
part because they don't provide many updates to common FOSS after production. 
As an example, you need an update to something like cURL (v7.19 from the 
current RHEL6 yum update but v7.31 in real world) you'll have to get it from 
somewhere other than RedHat, and that could break a lot of stuff. And because 
they bashed Windows for so many years about this (DLL HELL) before drinking the 
Linux Kool-Aid, these folks are afraid to say Linux has exactly the same 
problems, or afraid to admit they don't update their system, or maybe they just 
don't know that their packages are a couple years old and unpatched. (No need 
for people to jump in to reassure us that you update your personal system(s) - 
trading anecdotes doesn't change the fact that other people do things 
differently.)

But the real point here ... is that once U2 is working, and it should out of 
the box, then it shouldn't break, as long as you don't change anything. It's 
been around since 2010 and CentOS is right there with it now. The only time you 
could have issues is when U2 is certified over a new RH release and CentOS 
hasn't caught up to them yet. The cost for not being with a current RHEL 
release is that you won't be able to install a brand new OS/DBMS combo with 
confidence, you'll just have to wait a while for the dust to settle. Now, what 
if you do get that brand new release of RH/UV and it breaks. You need to wait 
for Rocket to work with RH anyway. So if you're going to wait there anyway, why 
not just wait a little longer and get it all free?

You asked how much pain would we be introducing ... all we can tell is how 
much pain you could or might, not would. The odds are in your favor - 
chances are very slim that there will be an issue in RHEL that affects U2, that 
it will get fixed by RH but not passed on in CentOS. There's just a time delay 
- you'd be paying RedHat to get changes to you faster, that's all, but you'll 
eventually get the same changes from CentOS.

HTH
T 

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)

2013-07-17 Thread Tony Gravagno
From: George Gallen 
 Maybe because of Pick's lack of organization enforcement - that is
one
 of it's failings - it puts all the burden of documentation onto the
 programmers 

That's the essence of our being and arguably the strength of the
platform:  RDBMS sites have DBA's separate from the programmers. MV
sites traded away the DBAs and left schema to application developers
 who know BASIC ... which according to Edsger Dijkstra, the
teaching of BASIC should be rated as a criminal offence: it mutilates
the mind beyond recovery.  Nuf said. :)


 Nobody got time for that!

LOL - The quote that became a phenomenon - I only wish the poor person
who originally said it got royalties.

T

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Bill Haskett

Dawn:

I kind of figured.  :-)  Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine.  I 
would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free.


I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated and 
I know every machine I run is running the same version of Windows.  It 
seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with the software 
I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my life a lot 
easier.  IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, with virtual 
accounts as act like real Windows accounts.


Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows as 
it is on ..nix.  Although you may have specific reasons to run on ..nix 
I would think free shouldn't be one of them.


Just a thought.

Bill


- Original Message -
*From:* dw...@tincat-group.com
*To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
*Date:* 7/17/2013 10:48 AM
*Subject:* Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

Hi Bill -- Ah, this time I'm in the client seat, desiring a hosted solution
for Universe. We will choose the same box for starters for the web server
as well. The VAR runs IIS on Windows, but Apache on linux. Given that info,
which OS would you select for Universe 11.1?   --dawn


On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Bill Haskett wphask...@advantos.netwrote:


Are you saying your client wouldn't pay $750 for Windows Server 2008 R2?
  ...and you actually get paid?  :-)

Bill

--**--**

- Original Message -
*From:* dw...@tincat-group.com
*To:* U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
*Date:* 7/17/2013 6:41 AM
*Subject:* [U2] CentOS with Universe?

  We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application on a

supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I searched
the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good list of what
changes might be required to successfully run Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How
much pain would we be introducing for ourselves and our VAR, if they were
willing to play along?

Thanks.  --dawn


__**_
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/**mailman/listinfo/u2-usershttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users





___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Phil Walker
Hi Dan,

When will Universe be 64-bit? This year, next year, never. I am not after 
specific dates, but is it on the project lifeline?

Cheers

Phil

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath
Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 2:57 a.m.
To: U2 Users List
Cc: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is 
always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment 
difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely 
support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is 
currently 32-bit. 

CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a 
reported issue on a supported platform. 

As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes 
hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, 
we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not. 

Regards,
Dan

On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote:

 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application 
 on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I 
 searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good 
 list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe 
 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves 
 and our VAR, if they were willing to play along?
 
 Thanks.  --dawn
 --
 Dawn M. Wolthuis
 
 Take and give some delight today
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Anthonys Lists

On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote:

Dawn:

I kind of figured.  :-)  Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine.  
I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free.


It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of 
Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely 
different.


I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated 
and I know every machine I run is running the same version of 
Windows.  It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with 
the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my 
life a lot easier.  IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, 
with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts.


And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break 
Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of 
that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a stripped-down 
box with only the services you want. Especially with a net-facing 
system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything except IIS 
locked-down/disabled/deleted?


And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think you 
want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can administer 
the system you could run Apache on one system facing the net, on a 
totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your system drive) 
with a firewall between that and your UV system.


I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, 
net-facing, running both the web server and the database.


Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows 
as it is on ..nix.  Although you may have specific reasons to run on 
..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them.


Just a thought.


A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Bill Haskett
I'm not sure why you'd say that.  I wouldn't create a caveat that my 
time is worth nothing; thus, as Tony says, Linux ain't free.


I have very little trouble with Windows, so, again, I'm not sure what 
you refer to about not putting IIS and the dbms server on the same box 
and face it towards the internet...Windows is much better than it used 
to be. The minimal amount of configuration, along with a firewall device 
and/or router seems to work just fine, especially in our development 
environment.  Now, if you want to work with the Active Directory on 
Windows Server 2012, or configure a VPN on your firewall/VPN device, 
then you might as well just shoot yourself instead!  :-)


I use Windows because, in the aggregate, using it has saved me a lot of 
time with our customers.  YMMV...


Bill


- Original Message -
*From:* antli...@youngman.org.uk
*To:* u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
*Date:* 7/17/2013 12:25 PM
*Subject:* Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote:

Dawn:

I kind of figured.  :-)  Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be 
fine.  I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is 
free.


It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of 
Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely 
different.


I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated 
and I know every machine I run is running the same version of 
Windows.  It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with 
the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my 
life a lot easier.  IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is 
too, with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts.


And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break 
Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of 
that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a 
stripped-down box with only the services you want. Especially with a 
net-facing system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything 
except IIS locked-down/disabled/deleted?


And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think 
you want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can 
administer the system you could run Apache on one system facing the 
net, on a totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your 
system drive) with a firewall between that and your UV system.


I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, 
net-facing, running both the web server and the database.


Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows 
as it is on ..nix.  Although you may have specific reasons to run on 
..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them.


Just a thought.


A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Wjhonson
But.
Speaking of Universe on Windows, we've gone through a hundred or so Windows 
upgrades, and I can't point out one that's had any affect on Universe at all.

So while it's true that Windows upgrades can break things, they don't seem to 
be breaking Universe.

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Anthonys Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk
To: u2-users u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 12:26 pm
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?


On 17/07/2013 19:09, Bill Haskett wrote:
 Dawn:

 I kind of figured.  :-)  Whatever you decide, I'm sure would be fine.  
 I would just not look for anything free, because nothing is free.

It's only free if your time is worth nothing - I think that's one of 
Tony's quotes. Just don't forget, linux is Free, which is completely 
different.

 I run everything on Windows because everything in the O/S is updated 
 and I know every machine I run is running the same version of 
 Windows.  It seems when Windows updates I have very few problems with 
 the software I'm running on the machine. Surprisingly, this makes my 
 life a lot easier.  IIS is easy to install, and 3rd party SFTP is too, 
 with virtual accounts as act like real Windows accounts.

And yet we hear loads of stories about how updates regularly break 
Windows ... although they tend to be client stuff that suffers most of 
that. The counter-advantage of linux is it's easy to run a stripped-down 
box with only the services you want. Especially with a net-facing 
system, how easy is it to run Windows with everything except IIS 
locked-down/disabled/deleted?

And on linux you have total control over updates too. I don't think you 
want to run gentoo like me, but if you've got someone who can administer 
the system you could run Apache on one system facing the net, on a 
totally locked-down system (maybe even with a DVD as your system drive) 
with a firewall between that and your UV system.

I'd be a little bit worried about having just one Windows system, 
net-facing, running both the web server and the database.

 Although I run UniData, I think UniVerse is just as stable on Windows 
 as it is on ..nix.  Although you may have specific reasons to run on 
 ..nix I would think free shouldn't be one of them.

 Just a thought.

A sensible thought :-) but you can see which way I'd go :-)

Cheers,
Wol
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)

2013-07-17 Thread Susan Joslyn
 

 

From: Susan Joslyn [mailto:sjos...@sjplus.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:55 PM
To: 'Wjhonson'
Subject: RE: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)

 

Hi Will,

You can prevent creation of new items for all dictionaries or a designated
set of 'sensitive' files.  You can also allow the creation but have the
items collect on a project where some kind of administrator would review and
approve or discard them.  Mainly by having control of the process to make
the dictionaries - then lots of choices from there depending on the desire
result.

 

Make sense?  If I answered the wrong question, ask me again!
Susan

 

From: Wjhonson [mailto:wjhon...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:48 PM
To: sjos...@sjplus.com; u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)

 

How does PRC prevent programmers from creating extra dict entries ?

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Susan Joslyn sjos...@sjplus.com
To: u2-users u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 1:45 pm
Subject: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)

Greetings,
Keeping the dictionary clean // authorizing change // tracking change //
synching - PRC helps with that.  
 
Weak excuse for a plug, right?
 
Susan Joslyn
SJ+ Systems Associates, Inc.
PRC - It Governance for U2.
-
 
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 09:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Robinson donr_w...@yahoo.com
To: U2 Users List u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Fwd:  UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)
Message-ID:
1373993983.14363.yahoomail...@web120205.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
 
Wj,
?
Sarcasm on:
Use the Don security theory, first?offense, cut off a couple of fingers,
second offense, cut off right hand, problem solved.
Sarcasm off
?
Seriously, this boils down to a management issue, employee?supervision and
buy in.
 
Don? 
 
 

From: Wjhonson wjhon...@aol.com
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org 
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 12:44 PM
Subject: [U2] Fwd: UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Wjhonson wjhon...@aol.com
To: u2-users u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 9:42 am
Subject: Re: [U2] UML mapping tool for MV (UniVerse)
 
 
But with programmers able to create new DICT entries as they will, how do
you *keep* it spotless?
 
 
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


[U2] Universe Triggers

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel Jorgenson
Has anyone setup and used Unix/Universe triggers.  Where do you start? Any 
manuals to get started?


Regards,

Dan Jorgenson
Senior Systems Analyst

SICK, Inc.
6900 West 110th Street
Minneapolis, MN  55438  USA
Phone: 952.941.6780
Fax: 952.941.9287
Direct: 952.829.4732
http://www.sickusa.com

This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and 
may contain confidential or privileged information.  If you are not the 
intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, use or distribution is 
prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please 
notify us by reply email and immediately and permanently delete this 
message and any attachments.  Thank you.
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


[U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread William Brutzman
The shipping clerk's XP PC died.

I bought him a new Win7 PC.  I guess I made the mistake of installing the
64-Bit Rocket ODBC.

When I tried to do an ODBC mapping, the United Parcel Service WorldShip
desktop software indicated something like an architecture incompatibility
when trying to connect to UniVerse 10,3.6 running on HP-Ux Itanium.

Even though I uninstalled the 64-bit ODBC from Win7... the 64 bit ODBC
still appears in the Win7 Control Panel, Administrative Tools, ODBC Data
Sources.

Help sorting all this out would be appreciated.

--Bill
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread Phil Walker
You need to use the 32bit ODBC Driver Manager which is under the a WOW64??? 
directory or something similar. I don't have access to a system at the 
moment.

And then use the 32bit ODBC Driver.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of William Brutzman
Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 10:35 a.m.
To: U2 Users List
Subject: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

The shipping clerk's XP PC died.

I bought him a new Win7 PC.  I guess I made the mistake of installing the 
64-Bit Rocket ODBC.

When I tried to do an ODBC mapping, the United Parcel Service WorldShip desktop 
software indicated something like an architecture incompatibility when trying 
to connect to UniVerse 10,3.6 running on HP-Ux Itanium.

Even though I uninstalled the 64-bit ODBC from Win7... the 64 bit ODBC still 
appears in the Win7 Control Panel, Administrative Tools, ODBC Data Sources.

Help sorting all this out would be appreciated.

--Bill
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread Robert Houben
\windows\syswow64

With Microsoft typical logic this is where 32 bit versions of commands reside 
on x64. 64 bit ones are in system32.

Sent from my cell phone.

On 2013-07-17, at 3:50 PM, Phil Walker p...@gnosys.co.nz wrote:

 You need to use the 32bit ODBC Driver Manager which is under the a WOW64??? 
 directory or something similar. I don't have access to a system at the 
 moment.
 
 And then use the 32bit ODBC Driver.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
 [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of William Brutzman
 Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 10:35 a.m.
 To: U2 Users List
 Subject: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7
 
 The shipping clerk's XP PC died.
 
 I bought him a new Win7 PC.  I guess I made the mistake of installing the 
 64-Bit Rocket ODBC.
 
 When I tried to do an ODBC mapping, the United Parcel Service WorldShip 
 desktop software indicated something like an architecture incompatibility 
 when trying to connect to UniVerse 10,3.6 running on HP-Ux Itanium.
 
 Even though I uninstalled the 64-bit ODBC from Win7... the 64 bit ODBC still 
 appears in the Win7 Control Panel, Administrative Tools, ODBC Data Sources.
 
 Help sorting all this out would be appreciated.
 
 --Bill
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread Phil Walker
Yes,  that is it. I always though it strange that the 64 bit ones are under 
system 32, and 32 under 64sort of reverse psychology.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Robert Houben
Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 11:11 a.m.
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

\windows\syswow64

With Microsoft typical logic this is where 32 bit versions of commands reside 
on x64. 64 bit ones are in system32.

Sent from my cell phone.

On 2013-07-17, at 3:50 PM, Phil Walker p...@gnosys.co.nz wrote:

 You need to use the 32bit ODBC Driver Manager which is under the a WOW64??? 
 directory or something similar. I don't have access to a system at the 
 moment.
 
 And then use the 32bit ODBC Driver.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
 [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of William Brutzman
 Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 10:35 a.m.
 To: U2 Users List
 Subject: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7
 
 The shipping clerk's XP PC died.
 
 I bought him a new Win7 PC.  I guess I made the mistake of installing the 
 64-Bit Rocket ODBC.
 
 When I tried to do an ODBC mapping, the United Parcel Service WorldShip 
 desktop software indicated something like an architecture incompatibility 
 when trying to connect to UniVerse 10,3.6 running on HP-Ux Itanium.
 
 Even though I uninstalled the 64-bit ODBC from Win7... the 64 bit ODBC still 
 appears in the Win7 Control Panel, Administrative Tools, ODBC Data Sources.
 
 Help sorting all this out would be appreciated.
 
 --Bill
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel McGrath
UniVerse is already 64-bit on AIX and HP-UX and have been for quite a while. We 
plan on Windows 64-bit being out later this year (people are already beta 
testing it) and are working on Linux and Solaris.

For most people, unless you are a really big system, you don't really get much 
benefit from being 64-bit due to the database architecture which allows you to 
bypass many of the reasons other databases may be more easily restricted by 
being 32-bit only.

Cheers,
Dan

From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org on behalf of Phil Walker 
p...@gnosys.co.nz
Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2013 12:31 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

Hi Dan,

When will Universe be 64-bit? This year, next year, never. I am not after 
specific dates, but is it on the project lifeline?

Cheers

Phil

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath
Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 2:57 a.m.
To: U2 Users List
Cc: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

While CentOS is effectively RHEL, and generally speaking, runs fine, there is 
always the chance that a difference is introduced (say an environment 
difference on the machine that compiled the source) that could adversely 
support UniVerse. CentOS 32-bit will be easier for you as our RHEL port is 
currently 32-bit.

CentOS is not a Rocket supported OS. Rocket may require you to reproduce a 
reported issue on a supported platform.

As a word of caution, we commonly work with OS providers (and sometimes 
hardware providers) to determine the root cause of an issue. With RHEL support, 
we have someone to work with, with CentOS we do not.

Regards,
Dan

On Jul 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Dawn Wolthuis dw...@tincat-group.com wrote:

 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application
 on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I
 searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does anyone have a good
 list of what changes might be required to successfully run Universe
 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for ourselves
 and our VAR, if they were willing to play along?

 Thanks.  --dawn
 --
 Dawn M. Wolthuis

 Take and give some delight today
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread Robert Houben
I agree... I think moving all the real stuff out of system32 would have been 
monumental.  And the WOW64 part of SysWOW64 stands for Windows On Windows-x64.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Phil Walker
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 4:22 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

Yes,  that is it. I always though it strange that the 64 bit ones are under 
system 32, and 32 under 64sort of reverse psychology.

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Robert Houben
Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 11:11 a.m.
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

\windows\syswow64

With Microsoft typical logic this is where 32 bit versions of commands reside 
on x64. 64 bit ones are in system32.

Sent from my cell phone.

On 2013-07-17, at 3:50 PM, Phil Walker p...@gnosys.co.nz wrote:

 You need to use the 32bit ODBC Driver Manager which is under the a WOW64??? 
 directory or something similar. I don't have access to a system at the 
 moment.
 
 And then use the 32bit ODBC Driver.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
 [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of William Brutzman
 Sent: Thursday, 18 July 2013 10:35 a.m.
 To: U2 Users List
 Subject: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7
 
 The shipping clerk's XP PC died.
 
 I bought him a new Win7 PC.  I guess I made the mistake of installing the 
 64-Bit Rocket ODBC.
 
 When I tried to do an ODBC mapping, the United Parcel Service WorldShip 
 desktop software indicated something like an architecture incompatibility 
 when trying to connect to UniVerse 10,3.6 running on HP-Ux Itanium.
 
 Even though I uninstalled the 64-bit ODBC from Win7... the 64 bit ODBC still 
 appears in the Win7 Control Panel, Administrative Tools, ODBC Data Sources.
 
 Help sorting all this out would be appreciated.
 
 --Bill
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
 ___
 U2-Users mailing list
 U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread John Hester
Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers but run 
UV on RHEL.  UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel it would be 
too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform.  And I would take 
Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as Windows one step 
further and say that it's worse.  I choose to run UV on RHEL because I rely 
heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities like cron and 
open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget.  Installing all available updates 
a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never do, though, because the 
risk of breaking something is too high.  To give an example, I installed all 
the latest updates on the less mission-critical of our CentOS servers a while 
back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use to authenticate wifi clients 
via Active Directory.  Fortunately the other CentOS server is a backup 
freeRADIUS server, but it was still time consuming to fix.  When RH or CentOS 
updates an app, any config files replaced are backed up in the current location 
with an extension of .rpmnew.  When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every 
config file in its directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the 
installation.  Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions 
of all 7 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and 
painstakingly merging the original config into the new files.  I probably spent 
a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application.  UV is in use 24x7 
and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic.

Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if the 
initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it.  I would 
thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's stable, you 
aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going forward.  Lack 
of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it, but good security 
isn't a black and white issue.  If no unnecessary services are listening on the 
box, no end users have direct access to the OS shell, and the box isn't 
directly open to the internet, it's pretty secure IMHO.  RH may issue a ton of 
critical security updates for various services, but if you're not running 
those services, or if a user needs OS shell access they don't have to execute a 
privilege escalation, those updates are irrelevant.  There are lots of add'l 
security measures that you can take to further protect the server, such as 
installing the free OSSEC intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and 
running ssh on a non-default port.  As Dan said, the question of whether or not 
to run UV on an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of 
the client where it's installed and how they're using it.  It's not appropriate 
for our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the 
risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily tell 
them it's a bad idea.

-John 

-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from RHEL 
isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system 
configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If you 
are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for development 
or support, then it is probably less of an issue.

If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story.

Dan McGrath
Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab
Rocket Software
4600 South Ulster Street  ·  Suite 1100  ·   Denver, CO 80237 ·  USA
T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W: u2.rocketsoftware.com




-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

 From: Dawn Wolthuis
 We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application 
 on a supported platform, but we would prefer not to pay for RHEL 6. I 
 searched the list and found a few tidbits, but does
anyone
 have a good list of what changes might be required to successfully
run
 Universe 11.1 on CentOS? How much pain would we be introducing for 
 ourselves and our VAR, if they were willing to play along?

Dawn, you have accurate responses from everyone:
1) Should be exactly the same.
2) Might not be.
3) There is risk involved.

Personally I run CentOS whenever I need Linux. But it does have its own errors 
from time to time, and sometimes it takes a while to get them fixed - just 
visit the CentOS forum and see what people are talking about. That's the 

Re: [U2] [U2} UniVerse, ODBC, 64-Bit, Windows7

2013-07-17 Thread Tony Gravagno
From: Robert Houben 
 \windows\syswow64

Rather than Windows On Windows I like to think Microsoft has built-in
World Of Warcraft.

 With Microsoft typical logic this is where 32 bit versions of
commands
 reside on x64. 64 bit ones are in system32.

(I know Robert is aware of why MS did the WoW thing initially but I'm
having some fun here.)

Yes, compare this to the perfectly logical Linux where /usr/lib64 is
just a symlink to /usr/lib, where both 32bit and 64bit applications
are stored together.

Of course that depends on your distro but that apparently hasn't
confused any Linux developers ... oh wait it has. As an example Ubuntu
is more explicit with /usr/lib, /usr/lib32, and /usr/lib64. Oh wait,
they changed between v2 and v3 to multiarch with usr/lib and now
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu. But I'm sure that moving target didn't
confuse developers ... oh wait it did...

I'm not adverse to bashing any entity for stupidity, and Microsoft
deserves its share. But it's tough to bash one group when the
alternative is just as bad at the exact same things. That's twice
just today that I get a chance to comment on such things.

T

___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Dawn Wolthuis
Thanks to all who responded. There is plenty of wisdom in the sum of all of
these posts. We are nailing down costs from the hosting provider for each
option. It looks like Windows 2008 Standard is less expensive per month
than RHEL 6 with the hosting site we are using (primarily because of the
$500 annual cost for RHEL). My colleague uses his own perl scripts with
apache, so he is not excited about IIS. My only issue with IIS has to do
with poor experiences to date, but when I check the date, it is somewhere
around 2001. Perhaps I need not hold a grudge that long?  cheers!  --dawn


On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:48 PM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote:

 Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers
 but run UV on RHEL.  UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel
 it would be too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform.  And I
 would take Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as
 Windows one step further and say that it's worse.  I choose to run UV on
 RHEL because I rely heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities
 like cron and open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget.  Installing all
 available updates a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never
 do, though, because the risk of breaking something is too high.  To give an
 example, I installed all the latest updates on the less mission-critical of
 our CentOS servers a while back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use
 to authenticate wifi clients via Active Directory.  Fortunately the other
 CentOS server is a backup freeRADIUS server, but it was still time
 consuming to fix.  When RH or CentOS updates an app, any config files
 replaced are backed up in the current location with an extension of
 .rpmnew.  When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every config file in its
 directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the installation.
  Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions of all 7
 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and
 painstakingly merging the original config into the new files.  I probably
 spent a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application.  UV is in
 use 24x7 and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic.

 Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if
 the initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it.  I
 would thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's
 stable, you aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going
 forward.  Lack of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it,
 but good security isn't a black and white issue.  If no unnecessary
 services are listening on the box, no end users have direct access to the
 OS shell, and the box isn't directly open to the internet, it's pretty
 secure IMHO.  RH may issue a ton of critical security updates for various
 services, but if you're not running those services, or if a user needs OS
 shell access they don't have to execute a privilege escalation, those
 updates are irrelevant.  There are lots of add'l security measures that you
 can take to further protect the server, such as installing the free OSSEC
 intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and running ssh on a
 non-default port.  As Dan said, the question of whether or not to run UV on
 an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of the client
 where it's installed and how they're using it.  It's not appropriate for
 our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the
 risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily
 tell them it's a bad idea.

 -John

 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:
 u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath
 Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM
 To: U2 Users List
 Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

 In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from
 RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system
 configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If
 you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for
 development or support, then it is probably less of an issue.

 If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story.

 Dan McGrath
 Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab
 Rocket Software
 4600 South Ulster Street  ·  Suite 1100  ·   Denver, CO 80237 ·  USA
 T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W:
 u2.rocketsoftware.com




 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:
 u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
 Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:38 AM
 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
 Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

  From: Dawn Wolthuis
  We have a VAR who would prefer to load Universe and their application
  

Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel McGrath
Any reason you cannot do Apache on Windows?

From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org 
u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org on behalf of Dawn Wolthuis 
dw...@tincat-group.com
Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2013 8:26 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

Thanks to all who responded. There is plenty of wisdom in the sum of all of
these posts. We are nailing down costs from the hosting provider for each
option. It looks like Windows 2008 Standard is less expensive per month
than RHEL 6 with the hosting site we are using (primarily because of the
$500 annual cost for RHEL). My colleague uses his own perl scripts with
apache, so he is not excited about IIS. My only issue with IIS has to do
with poor experiences to date, but when I check the date, it is somewhere
around 2001. Perhaps I need not hold a grudge that long?  cheers!  --dawn


On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:48 PM, John Hester jhes...@momtex.com wrote:

 Dawn, just to add my 0.02, I have a couple of production CentOS servers
 but run UV on RHEL.  UV is the most mission-critical app we have and I feel
 it would be too much of a risk to run it on an unsupported platform.  And I
 would take Tony's point that Linux has the exact same update headaches as
 Windows one step further and say that it's worse.  I choose to run UV on
 RHEL because I rely heavily on custom UV integration with system utilities
 like cron and open-source apps like postfix, cURL and wget.  Installing all
 available updates a la Windows on the RHEL UV box is something I'd never
 do, though, because the risk of breaking something is too high.  To give an
 example, I installed all the latest updates on the less mission-critical of
 our CentOS servers a while back and it broke the freeRADIUS service we use
 to authenticate wifi clients via Active Directory.  Fortunately the other
 CentOS server is a backup freeRADIUS server, but it was still time
 consuming to fix.  When RH or CentOS updates an app, any config files
 replaced are backed up in the current location with an extension of
 .rpmnew.  When freeRADIUS starts up it reads every config file in its
 directory regardless of name, so this totally borked the installation.
  Fixing it was a matter of opening both the old and new versions of all 7
 replaced config files in a GUI text editor with diff capability and
 painstakingly merging the original config into the new files.  I probably
 spent a couple of hours on it, and that was just one application.  UV is in
 use 24x7 and an outage like that on our UV server would be catastrophic.

 Having said that, I think a case could be made for running UV on CentOS if
 the initial installation runs stably and you don't plan to patch it.  I
 would thoroughly test every aspect of UV, but once you're certain it's
 stable, you aren't likely to need support if you don't break anything going
 forward.  Lack of patches sounds like a security risk on the face of it,
 but good security isn't a black and white issue.  If no unnecessary
 services are listening on the box, no end users have direct access to the
 OS shell, and the box isn't directly open to the internet, it's pretty
 secure IMHO.  RH may issue a ton of critical security updates for various
 services, but if you're not running those services, or if a user needs OS
 shell access they don't have to execute a privilege escalation, those
 updates are irrelevant.  There are lots of add'l security measures that you
 can take to further protect the server, such as installing the free OSSEC
 intrusion detection utility from Trend Micro and running ssh on a
 non-default port.  As Dan said, the question of whether or not to run UV on
 an unsupported platform really depends on the risk tolerance of the client
 where it's installed and how they're using it.  It's not appropriate for
 our environment, but if someone else decides the cost savings outweigh the
 risks for them after carefully considering both, I wouldn't necessarily
 tell them it's a bad idea.

 -John

 -Original Message-
 From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:
 u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McGrath
 Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:00 AM
 To: U2 Users List
 Subject: Re: [U2] CentOS with Universe?

 In Dawn's case, I agree with Tony. At larger scales though, support from
 RHEL isn't just bug fixes that CentOS gets eventually, but is also system
 configuration assistance for issues, particularly around performance. If
 you are not running a production server yourself, but are using it for
 development or support, then it is probably less of an issue.

 If you are running your core business on it 24/7, it's a different story.

 Dan McGrath
 Managing Director, U2 Servers Lab
 Rocket Software
 4600 South Ulster Street  ·  Suite 1100  ·   Denver, CO 80237 ·  USA
 T: +1 720 475 8098 · E: dmcgr...@rocketsoftware.com · W:
 u2.rocketsoftware.com




 -Original Message-
 From: