Jeffrey B. Layton wrote:
Robert G. Brown wrote:
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, John Hearns wrote:
And re. the future version of Scientific Linux, there has been debate
on the list re. co-operating with CENTos and essentially using CENTos
as a base, and SL being an overlay of specific application and
library RPMs.
Pros and cons either way there.
IMO, most cluster builders will find it more advantageous to track the
FC releases instead of using RHEL or Centos or things derived therefrom.
Only if they are not building clusters for commercial customers, or
customers with specific OS (distro) requirements. FC simply will not
fly in a shop that demands long term support. We deal with lots of these.
I know there are many users and supporters of FC here. I have
used/played with 1,3,4,5,6 so far. I won't comment on quality. I will
comment on longevity and perception. FC is not designed to be a long
term supported distro. It is, by design fast moving. It has, as a
result of its rapid evolution, more bleeding edge bits than regular
longer haul distros. On the perception side, pretty much everyone
(RedHat included) with a few notable exceptions on this list, views FC
as less a distribution unto itself and more as a testing ground for
future RH technologies. This doesn't mean people haven't been using it
as a distribution unto itself. If you don't need and don't care about
long term support, don't care about occasional ... surprises ... in
upgrading (FC4->FC6 on one of my machines caused it to kernel panic
almost immediately, until I added some magic to /boot/grub/menu.lst to
stop this), it could be a fine distro for some groups of users.
Hardware support is key, and Centos can get long in the tooth pretty
quickly in a cluster environment with any sort of annual turnover.
I think this is an interesting question. On the one hand, you're absolutely
right in that faster moving distros like FC (or Ubuntu) allow newer
hardware
to be used quickly and newer kernel developments to be used to advantage.
On the other hand, ISV's, who many cluster users depend upon (not so many
on this list) are reluctant, to say the least, to switch to a faster
moving distro.
Heh... Few if any ISVs have ditched their RH7.3 support to date (or
SuSE 8). Years after such distros ceased to be marketed/supported by
the vendors.
This is one of the strongest arguments to certifying to an LSB and not a
distro. Unfortunately, some distro makers (cough cough) choose to
largely ignore the LSB. Which means ISVs certify to distros. Which
gives us the current situation.
They are happy with something like RHEL or SLES. I know one ISV that
only recently switched to RHEL 4 from RHEL 3! There are many more
ISV stories to tell (I'm sure Greg could share some as well), but believe
me, they don't want to change and many times, won't change.
New distros and new releases of distros cost them money to certify
against. Sure, if their software were open, the certification could be
public. I somehow don't expect these ISVs to do that.
Of course, in defense of the the ISV's, some of their customers are
required
to keep certain versions of their software on certain OS versions for a
very long time. So the ISV's have gotten very conservative in their choice
and support of distros.
I count largely 2 distros supported these days. RH of some flavor, and
SuSE of some flavor. Most everything else is in the noise (though
Greg's company and a few others do support more).
So this leaves us, and many times cluster vendors and integrators, in a
pickle. If you need ISV codes but also want new hardware, what do you
do? I don't have a good answer. The only answer I can think of is to
continue
to educate the ISV's and perhaps get them to support something a little
more basic such as a kernel/glibc combination or at least a very basic
(i.e. minimal) set of "parts" in a distro.
LSB. It is sort of like an ABI for MPI. It really needs to happen.
LSB support is at this moment, more of a checkbox on government
procurements, as compared to being something that ISVs strive for.
--
Joseph Landman, Ph.D
Founder and CEO
Scalable Informatics LLC,
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com
phone: +1 734 786 8423
fax : +1 734 786 8452
cell : +1 734 612 4615
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
