SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

June 2004

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 2 Jun 2004 11:37:15 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 11:09, Steve Traylen wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Corrie Kost wrote:
>
> > I would tend to favour following the Redhat choices for what is loaded
> > by the core distributions. To do otherwise would eventually cause problems.

> Just to second this the absolute ideal as I see it for this is that the core
> version be as much as possible identical to redhat. Including for instance
> bug for bug matches even if they may be trivial to fix.
>

I did not expect this to be contentious and I don't feel that strongly
if people want a "bug for bug match".

Just for the record though, I believe in this instance it is a bug:
See http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113485

This bug is fixed in Fedora Core 2.  Perhaps it will get fixed in RHEL
also.  Maybe it has, I have no way of checking.

Since the packages appropriate for a default scientific workstation will
be substantially different from those for a default corporate desktop it
might be helpful if there were a simple mechanism to produce a good base
scientific workstation, e.g. a list of packages to add/remove.

--
John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
Dept of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ

ATOM RSS1 RSS2