Cluster Poll Results (tangent into OS choices) - options
alvin at Mail.Linux-Consulting.com
Mon Nov 3 21:13:21 EST 2003
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31 2003 at 13:37,
> Wei Deng <weideng at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 02:44:59PM -0500, Vann H. Walke wrote:
> > > - OSCAR / Rocks / etc... - generally installed on top of another
> > > distribution. We still have to pick a base distribution.
> > From what I heard from Rocks mailing list, they will release 3.1.0 the
> > next Month, which will be based on RHEL 3.0, compiled from source code
> > that is publicly available, and free of charge.
> Rebuilding RHEL3 into a freebie-ripoff version doesn't pass the smile-test
> for corporations trying to coexist and actually work with Red Hat. Why
> not focus that questionable rebuilding effort on a more worthwhile task?
> E.g. porting Fedora Core to support amd64, ia64, etc; adding features to
> Fedora Core that are relevant to clustering, etc.
i think that any proprietory sw should be avoided if it requires $$$ and
unfortunately, sometimes, 3rd party sw is built and tested against things
like RH - AS and its permutations and derivatives .. so my feeling is to
avoid those 3rd party vendors too
- it's a choice of:
- pay RH licenses ( cheaper than an inhouse $150K/yr linux guy ??)
- get an in-house linux dude that can support all the GPL stuff
and tweek it to your needs/requirements
- buy/get a "free" distro that has most of the apps you need
- working on the lastest/breatest pre-release or beta/alpha release
implies you have lots of in-house development expertise or the
ability to manipulate the vendors priorities to fix the bugs you find
- am thinking, ( naively ? ) why is it so hard to get a distro that does
what one needs and avoid "license fees"
- what's so special ...
- in every instance that a 3rd party vendor required
xx-linux-version-0.5 ... i've been able to make those apps work
on the latest/greatest version of said vendor or other distro
- reading the various sw licenses is also a full time job too :-)
- support should be done by in-house staff, or outsourced to
expensive "support outfits" like rh, ibm, and few
- doing support in house is best, if staff is available, in
which case, the fact that redhat is not providing support for
older distros is a non-issue ..
- the fact that redhat and other distro wants to collect
license fee or break something that used to work in prior releases
is a big problem in my book, especially when 90%-99% of the
apps that's running is all GPL'd
- but, on the bright side, at least rh, is directly or indirectly
doing and supporting a lot of development work that is released as
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf