Re: Another distribution question
> Not entirely we think: > > LSB does help in the the layout for scripts, like /usr/local/xxx for > sendmail and /etc/init.d etc, but the two main distros we > certify Rh adv > srv and SuSE SLES both seemingly will have differences in the > near future > in respects to libs, SLES will be taking an approach with NGPT (Next > Generation Posix Threads) an IBM sponsored project, while RH > will be going > with another flavor, each differs, one is M:N while the other > is 1:1. The > confusion for us now is do we just compile against whatever > is in glibc or > do we go back to a port for ea distro and have some advantages? Hmm. It would seem on the surface that compiling against glibc and sticking to a LSB level would probably be the Right Thing, but you have a point on possible performance advantages, etc. Still, aren't the API semantics of the thread stuff supposed to be the same, and then resolved with dynamic linking? Without that guarantee, the LSB probably isn't really worth much. > It is not un-common for Os > vendors to "create" new standards, or claim there are new ones and > everybody should do this or that :~) That's the great thing about standards; there's so many to choose from. 8-) -- db
Re: Another distribution question
Not so much a certification issue in most cases. It's a source code issue.
Will the vendor give away the source? Samba and Sendmail, etc, are open
source. Cache' isn't. Oracle isn't. Etc. THATS where the problem lies.
|-+>
| | John Summerfield |
| | |
| | Sent by: Linux on 390|
| | Port |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | EDU> |
| ||
| ||
| | 11/26/2002 03:10 PM |
| | Please respond to|
| | Linux on 390 Port|
| ||
|-+>
>--|
|
|
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: Another distribution question
|
>--|
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote:
> Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing.
> We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to
> call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment.
> You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must
> specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not
> compatible(at this time).
I know some folk value certification, but I wonder. Some time ago a
local business would not run Oracle on Linux "because it's not
certified."
It was actually available and it ran fine.
Take a look at the software you run:
Is Samba certified?
Is Sendmail/Postfix/Exim?
So far as I know, _none_ of the hardware I run Linux on is certified.
--
Cheers
John.
Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at
http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 23:16, David Boyes wrote: > Does the introduction of the LSB and the informal certification scripts > for LSB 1.x compliance address this at all? I'm thinking that if the > application is written to be LSB x.y compliant, then it should work and > be supportable on other LSB x.y compliant platforms, right? On the same architecture
Re: Another distribution question
Not entirely we think: LSB does help in the the layout for scripts, like /usr/local/xxx for sendmail and /etc/init.d etc, but the two main distros we certify Rh adv srv and SuSE SLES both seemingly will have differences in the near future in respects to libs, SLES will be taking an approach with NGPT (Next Generation Posix Threads) an IBM sponsored project, while RH will be going with another flavor, each differs, one is M:N while the other is 1:1. The confusion for us now is do we just compile against whatever is in glibc or do we go back to a port for ea distro and have some advantages? I believe we willl maintain a single xxx123-LNX.rpm moving forward, LSB helped us eliminate xxx123-SuSE.rpm and xxx123-RH.rpm, but it reamins to be seen I think how close the LSB spec will hold Linux distos for ISVs like us and how well those distros comply. It is not un-common for Os vendors to "create" new standards, or claim there are new ones and everybody should do this or that :~) Regards, Jon Jon R. Doyle Sendmail Inc. 6425 Christie Ave Emeryville, Ca. 94608 (o_ (o_ (o_ //\ (/)_ (\)_ V_/_ On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, David Boyes wrote: > > Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux > > because it is > > a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user > > level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works > > through QA > > processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am > > running SuSE SLES > > with 2.4.18, but I find they have patched the kernel with pre-emptive > > stuff, or any number of things that seemed interesting in the dev > > community, or say new glibc, and now Sendmail filters or > > something are not > > working correctly. So you see we have to pick certain levels of the > > platform and QA that and call it "known to work". You find an > > issue, we > > can reproduct that internally on the same platform, much more > > reasonable > > to keep quality control. > > Does the introduction of the LSB and the informal certification scripts > for LSB 1.x compliance address this at all? I'm thinking that if the > application is written to be LSB x.y compliant, then it should work and > be supportable on other LSB x.y compliant platforms, right? > > -- db >
Re: Another distribution question
> Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux > because it is > a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user > level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works > through QA > processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am > running SuSE SLES > with 2.4.18, but I find they have patched the kernel with pre-emptive > stuff, or any number of things that seemed interesting in the dev > community, or say new glibc, and now Sendmail filters or > something are not > working correctly. So you see we have to pick certain levels of the > platform and QA that and call it "known to work". You find an > issue, we > can reproduct that internally on the same platform, much more > reasonable > to keep quality control. Does the introduction of the LSB and the informal certification scripts for LSB 1.x compliance address this at all? I'm thinking that if the application is written to be LSB x.y compliant, then it should work and be supportable on other LSB x.y compliant platforms, right? -- db
Re: Another distribution question
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Jon R. Doyle wrote: > We do certifiy through normal QA process SuSE SLES, RH Adv Srv for example > on Intel systems, and SuSE SLES on zSeries, this is the commercial > products, and I mention this because the thread started about Oracle from > what I read. Oracle has several levels from what I remember, one called > Validation like here: > I was, of couse, referring specifically to the free version that "everyone" runs because that's how their distribution is setup. > >http://www.suse.com/en/business/certifications/certified_software/oracle/certified.html > > SAP has something similar to the above, I even rememebr one tech doc > telling you to put a SuSE Kernel on top of a Redhat install to be > certified. > > Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux because it is > a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user > level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works through QA > processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am running SuSE SLES > with 2.4.18, but I find they have patched the kernel with pre-emptive > stuff, or any number of things that seemed interesting in the dev > community, or say new glibc, and now Sendmail filters or something are not > working correctly. So you see we have to pick certain levels of the > platform and QA that and call it "known to work". You find an issue, we > can reproduct that internally on the same platform, much more reasonable > to keep quality control. I've not run AS, but I do know that on various Red Hat Linux there have been security updates for glibc and the kernel (I just pulled in new versions of the kernel for 7.0 overnight). Then a site has a choice: fix the vulnerability and break certification or keep the certification and the vulnerability. What then? I'd favour fixing the vulnerability. How would you as a vendor respond to that? > Most HW vendors also certify against known version levels too, obviously > for driver sakes, in fact I have heard rumour once that Compaq did more QA > of Linux for that very reason than the Linux vendor themselves. That would not suprise me _iff_ you mean the kernel. I expect the same would apply to some others too, and I know some vendors are quite visible on the lkml. Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
Hello from Gregg C Levine Did I suggest that you were wrong? No. I don't do that. I only suggested something. It turns out that John Doyle, (Who I think I've met.), responded to my comment, and sort of, backed me up. So, unless you've done things, that the company, or I, don't want to know about, I'd say your okay. --- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > John Summerfield > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 5:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Another distribution question > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Gregg C Levine wrote: > > > Hello from Gregg C Levine > > Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor > > actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and > > not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then, > > it sure as taxes is now. > > If I'm wrong, then where's the evidence? Why would anyone bother paying > to have their free software certified? > > > > -- > > > Cheers > John. > > Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at > http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
Hello from Gregg C Levine It seems I've gone and done it again. Fast work, Jon Doyle, on putting that together. --- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Jon R. Doyle > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 6:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Another distribution question > > We do certifiy through normal QA process SuSE SLES, RH Adv Srv for example > on Intel systems, and SuSE SLES on zSeries, this is the commercial > products, and I mention this because the thread started about Oracle from > what I read. Oracle has several levels from what I remember, one called > Validation like here: > > http://www.suse.com/en/business/certifications/certified_software/oracle /certified.ht > ml > > SAP has something similar to the above, I even rememebr one tech doc > telling you to put a SuSE Kernel on top of a Redhat install to be > certified. > > Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux because it is > a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user > level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works through QA > processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am running SuSE SLES > with 2.4.18, but I find they have patched the kernel with pre-emptive > stuff, or any number of things that seemed interesting in the dev > community, or say new glibc, and now Sendmail filters or something are not > working correctly. So you see we have to pick certain levels of the > platform and QA that and call it "known to work". You find an issue, we > can reproduct that internally on the same platform, much more reasonable > to keep quality control. > > Most HW vendors also certify against known version levels too, obviously > for driver sakes, in fact I have heard rumour once that Compaq did more QA > of Linux for that very reason than the Linux vendor themselves. > > http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/servers/linux/hpLinuxcert-dl.html > > > Regards, > > Jon > > Jon R. Doyle > Sendmail Inc. > 6425 Christie Ave > Emeryville, Ca. 94608 > > >(o_ >(o_ (o_ //\ >(/)_ (\)_ V_/_ > > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Gregg C Levine wrote: > > > Hello from Gregg C Levine > > Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor > > actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and > > not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then, > > it sure as taxes is now. > > --- > > Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > > "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf > Of > > > John Summerfield > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:10 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Another distribution question > > > > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg > > thing. > > > > We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to > > > > call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment. > > > > You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must > > > > specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not > > > > compatible(at this time). > > > > > > I know some folk value certification, but I wonder. Some time ago a > > > local business would not run Oracle on Linux "because it's not > > > certified." > > > > > > It was actually available and it ran fine. > > > > > > Take a look at the software you run: > > > Is Samba certified? > > > Is Sendmail/Postfix/Exim? > > > > > > So far as I know, _none_ of the hardware I run Linux on is certified. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > John. > > > > > > Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at > > > http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb > >
Re: Another distribution question
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Gregg C Levine wrote: > Hello from Gregg C Levine > Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor > actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and > not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then, > it sure as taxes is now. If I'm wrong, then where's the evidence? Why would anyone bother paying to have their free software certified? -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
We do certifiy through normal QA process SuSE SLES, RH Adv Srv for example on Intel systems, and SuSE SLES on zSeries, this is the commercial products, and I mention this because the thread started about Oracle from what I read. Oracle has several levels from what I remember, one called Validation like here: http://www.suse.com/en/business/certifications/certified_software/oracle/certified.html SAP has something similar to the above, I even rememebr one tech doc telling you to put a SuSE Kernel on top of a Redhat install to be certified. Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux because it is a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works through QA processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am running SuSE SLES with 2.4.18, but I find they have patched the kernel with pre-emptive stuff, or any number of things that seemed interesting in the dev community, or say new glibc, and now Sendmail filters or something are not working correctly. So you see we have to pick certain levels of the platform and QA that and call it "known to work". You find an issue, we can reproduct that internally on the same platform, much more reasonable to keep quality control. Most HW vendors also certify against known version levels too, obviously for driver sakes, in fact I have heard rumour once that Compaq did more QA of Linux for that very reason than the Linux vendor themselves. http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/servers/linux/hpLinuxcert-dl.html Regards, Jon Jon R. Doyle Sendmail Inc. 6425 Christie Ave Emeryville, Ca. 94608 (o_ (o_ (o_ //\ (/)_ (\)_ V_/_ On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Gregg C Levine wrote: > Hello from Gregg C Levine > Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor > actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and > not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then, > it sure as taxes is now. > --- > Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > > John Summerfield > > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:10 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Another distribution question > > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote: > > > > > Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg > thing. > > > We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to > > > call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment. > > > You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must > > > specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not > > > compatible(at this time). > > > > I know some folk value certification, but I wonder. Some time ago a > > local business would not run Oracle on Linux "because it's not > > certified." > > > > It was actually available and it ran fine. > > > > Take a look at the software you run: > > Is Samba certified? > > Is Sendmail/Postfix/Exim? > > > > So far as I know, _none_ of the hardware I run Linux on is certified. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Cheers > > John. > > > > Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at > > http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb >
Re: Another distribution question
Hello from Gregg C Levine Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then, it sure as taxes is now. --- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > John Summerfield > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] Another distribution question > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote: > > > Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing. > > We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to > > call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment. > > You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must > > specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not > > compatible(at this time). > > I know some folk value certification, but I wonder. Some time ago a > local business would not run Oracle on Linux "because it's not > certified." > > It was actually available and it ran fine. > > Take a look at the software you run: > Is Samba certified? > Is Sendmail/Postfix/Exim? > > So far as I know, _none_ of the hardware I run Linux on is certified. > > > -- > > > Cheers > John. > > Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at > http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote: > Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing. > We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to > call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment. > You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must > specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not > compatible(at this time). I know some folk value certification, but I wonder. Some time ago a local business would not run Oracle on Linux "because it's not certified." It was actually available and it ran fine. Take a look at the software you run: Is Samba certified? Is Sendmail/Postfix/Exim? So far as I know, _none_ of the hardware I run Linux on is certified. -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote: > Rich, > > Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however. > > The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe > linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe > Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version > that is LINUX ready. But the webpage only lists the Intel platform. > Does that mean it won't run on any other hardware platform, even > though it is the same Linux distribution? Certification for SuSE on Intel does not mean it will even run on SuSE on S/390. I think you need to check with the vendor what their certification means. I can well imagine that it would mean a particular minimum level of hardware. -- Cheers John. Join the "Linux Support by Small Businesses" list at http://mail.computerdatasafe.com.au/mailman/listinfo/lssb
Re: Another distribution question
Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing. We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment. You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must specify z/series or S390 as a platform, and if not, then it is not compatible(at this time). Thanks, Dave __ Dave Jousma Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology Spartan Stores, Inc. PO Box 8700 Grand Rapids, MI 49518 (616) 878-2883 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another distribution question
> This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are > getting ready > to > put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent > applications > to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is > certified > to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is > certified on > run > on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform? No. Unless the vendor explicitly says "X on System/390 or zSeries", you can probably bet that it's for Intel only. > However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for > Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on > Linux on the > mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix > System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where > it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that > there > are not enough apps available yet. Vendors go where the volume is. There's more Intel boxes out there, so those go first. Usually, you need to ask/pester/browbeat the vendor to do a 390 release, but once they've done the Intel version, it's usually a much less difficult task to convince them to do an 390 release. > Granted, I'm not up to speed yet, but I thought a > distribution of Linux > was > just that regardless of the platform, and the the application > would run > anywhere that distribution ran(i.e. binary compatible). Within a processor architecture, that's usually true (modulo some stupidity about where certain files are located, which is getting better). Across architectures, well... that's a different story. It's more an issue of where the vendors are prepared to handle support. Intel PC weenies are a dime a dozen; S390 literate people are more expensive and a lot rarer, which raises the support cost, and most vendors don't release a product they can't support. It's Economics 101 -- most bang for the porting buck first, other stuff comes later. Note that even IBM can't muscle their software divisions to getting stuff to 390 Linux w/o making the support dollar case (cf the long delays for TSM, Domino, etc). -- db
Re: Another distribution question
Dave, In the particular instance you're referencing, Informix, unless IBM shows a version that runs on Linux/390, then they have only ported it to Intel Linux. They don't have a version for Linux/390 (that they'll ship to you), yet. They most likely will, just not yet. In general, suppliers list the hardware platforms that they are willing to support. If they don't list Linux/390, then they won't support it. If the source code is available, it may very well compile and run on Linux/390, but there's no guarantee. Far too many programmers do things like imbed assembly language code in their C modules, etc. There cannot be binary compatibility between Intel opcodes and S/390 opcodes. It just isn't going to happen. So, ISVs have to commit to supporting a platform and that costs time and money. There are differences between Intel Linux and Linux/390 (size of "int" used to be an issue, etc.) that don't necessarily have anything to do with the OS itself, but perhaps some of the assumptions buried in glibc, and so on. I run into those kinds of things frequently compiling software on Linux/390. I get failures that I don't see on Intel Linux that I have to work around. It gets very frustrating, but the point is that not everything just "compiles and runs" across the platforms. Hence, unless the ISV thinks they'll make enough revenue from porting their product to Linux/390, they won't do it. Mark Post -Original Message- From: Dave Jousma [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 8:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Another distribution question All, I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another question or two. This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready to put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent applications to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is certified to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is certified on run on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform? For example, I want to put up DB2-Connect, and on IBM's z/Series Linux page it says that V7.2 is certified to run on SuSe Linux at kernel 2.4, etc. However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on Linux on the mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that there are not enough apps available yet. Granted, I'm not up to speed yet, but I thought a distribution of Linux was just that regardless of the platform, and the the application would run anywhere that distribution ran(i.e. binary compatible). Can you guys shed some light? Thanks, Dave __ Dave Jousma Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology Spartan Stores, Inc. PO Box 8700 Grand Rapids, MI 49518 (616) 878-2883 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another distribution question
You are basically looking at instruction set incompatibility. Presumably,
INFORMIX ships binary distributions of their product so you 1 ) Don't have
to compile anything and 2) Can't compile or change their source code. This
effectively locks you into the INTEL environment unless and until a vendor
certifies for another underlying instruction set, be it Z/Architecture or
Alpha or
Basically it's a Linux version of the Intel/Alpha schism for Window$ NT.
Ultimately that vendor decided to abandon the Intel architecture. The best
way to prevent this from happening in the mainframe world is to contact the
vendor and let them know that your company would like their product (which
runs on Linux) to be certified for Linux on s/390 & Z/Series hardware.
We talked to the people who make the cache' database and have it available
for Linux. While they are not planning on working on a port of this
database software at the moment, they may revisit that decision in 6
months. Customer input is the ONLY way these companies will allocate
internal funds to maintain two distributions of their product lines. The
OS vendors have seen that there is money here. The software vendors must
still be made to see a business case.
|-+--->
| | Dave Jousma |
| ||
| | Sent by: Linux on |
| | 390 Port|
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | .EDU> |
| | |
| | |
| | 11/26/2002 08:26 AM |
| | Please respond to |
| | Linux on 390 Port |
| | |
|-+--->
>--|
|
|
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: Another distribution question
|
>--|
Rich,
Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe
linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe
Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version
that is LINUX ready. But the webpage only lists the Intel platform.
Does that mean it won't run on any other hardware platform, even
though it is the same Linux distribution?
Thanks again,
Dave
__
Dave Jousma
Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology
Spartan Stores, Inc.
PO Box 8700
Grand Rapids, MI 49518
(616) 878-2883
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rich Smrcina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11/26/2002 08:54 AM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: (bcc: Dave Jousma/Corporate/Spartan)
Subject:Re: Another distribution question
There are lots of examples of customers using DB2 on Linux for S/390. Feel
free to contact me for more information.
One of the largest motivating factors involved in getting vendors to port
their code to Linux for S/390 is customers. Jim Elliott can certainly
tell
you if and when, but if it isn't there yet, contact IBM and make a formal
request.
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 07:52 am, you wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another
question
> or two.
>
> This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready
> to
> put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent
> applications
> to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is
> certified
> to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is certified
on
> run
> on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform?
>
> For example, I want to put up DB2-Connect, and on IBM's z/Series Linux
> page it says that V7.2 is certified to run on SuSe Linux at kernel 2.4,
> etc.
> However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for
> Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on Linux on the
> mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for
Re: Another distribution question
I wouldn't take that for granted. If it doesn't specifically mention Linux for S/390, ask the vendor (or see if Jim responds). On Tuesday 26 November 2002 08:26 am, you wrote: > Rich, > > Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however. > > The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe > linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe > Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version > that is LINUX ready. But the webpage only lists the Intel platform. > Does that mean it won't run on any other hardware platform, even > though it is the same Linux distribution? > > Thanks again, > > Dave > > __ > Dave Jousma > Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology > Spartan Stores, Inc. > PO Box 8700 > Grand Rapids, MI 49518 > (616) 878-2883 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Rich Smrcina Sytek Services, Inc. Milwaukee, WI [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Catch the WAVV! Stay for Requirements and the Free for All! Update your S/390 skills in 4 days for a very reasonable price. WAVV 2003 in Winston-Salem, NC. April 25-29, 2003 For details see http://www.wavv.org
Re: Another distribution question
The general answer is "No". Being certified on SLES8 for Intel doesn't mean it's there for s390. -Original Message- Rich, Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however. The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version that is LINUX ready. But the webpage only lists the Intel platform. Does that mean it won't run on any other hardware platform, even though it is the same Linux distribution?
Re: Another distribution question
Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that there are not enough apps available yet. I think Linux is progressing much faster than USS did in its infancy. The vendors are climbing aboard this train while it's still gathering steam: http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/solutions/s390da/linuxproduct.html Paul
Re: Another distribution question
Java aside, applications written to run on Linux are source code compatible, not binary compatible. In the case of most commercial programs, where source code is generally not available to customers, you depend on the source code owner to compile and test their code for each new Linux platform. Software vendors have been much more receptive to Linux for zSeries than Unix System Services and the number of applications available is quite large and growing rapidly. However, these vendors still need business justification for the expense of building, testing, packaging, and supporting their application on zSeries Linux. It really helps when the customer (you) says, "If you build it, I will come." Chris *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 11/26/2002, at 8:52 AM, Dave Jousma wrote: >All, > >I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another question >or two. > >This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready >to >put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent >applications >to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is >certified >to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is certified on >run >on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform? > >For example, I want to put up DB2-Connect, and on IBM's z/Series Linux >page it says that V7.2 is certified to run on SuSe Linux at kernel 2.4, >etc. >However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for >Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on Linux on the >mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix >System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where >it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that >there >are not enough apps available yet. > >Granted, I'm not up to speed yet, but I thought a distribution of Linux >was >just that regardless of the platform, and the the application would run >anywhere that distribution ran(i.e. binary compatible). > >Can you guys shed some light? > >Thanks, Dave > >__ >Dave Jousma >Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology >Spartan Stores, Inc. >PO Box 8700 >Grand Rapids, MI 49518 >(616) 878-2883 >Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chris Rohrbach email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Another distribution question
Rich,
Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe
linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe
Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version
that is LINUX ready. But the webpage only lists the Intel platform.
Does that mean it won't run on any other hardware platform, even
though it is the same Linux distribution?
Thanks again,
Dave
__
Dave Jousma
Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology
Spartan Stores, Inc.
PO Box 8700
Grand Rapids, MI 49518
(616) 878-2883
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rich Smrcina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11/26/2002 08:54 AM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: (bcc: Dave Jousma/Corporate/Spartan)
Subject:Re: Another distribution question
There are lots of examples of customers using DB2 on Linux for S/390. Feel
free to contact me for more information.
One of the largest motivating factors involved in getting vendors to port
their code to Linux for S/390 is customers. Jim Elliott can certainly
tell
you if and when, but if it isn't there yet, contact IBM and make a formal
request.
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 07:52 am, you wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another
question
> or two.
>
> This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready
> to
> put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent
> applications
> to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is
> certified
> to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is certified
on
> run
> on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform?
>
> For example, I want to put up DB2-Connect, and on IBM's z/Series Linux
> page it says that V7.2 is certified to run on SuSe Linux at kernel 2.4,
> etc.
> However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for
> Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on Linux on the
> mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix
> System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where
> it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that
> there
> are not enough apps available yet.
>
> Granted, I'm not up to speed yet, but I thought a distribution of Linux
> was
> just that regardless of the platform, and the the application would run
> anywhere that distribution ran(i.e. binary compatible).
>
> Can you guys shed some light?
>
> Thanks, Dave
>
> __
> Dave Jousma
> Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology
> Spartan Stores, Inc.
> PO Box 8700
> Grand Rapids, MI 49518
> (616) 878-2883
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Rich Smrcina
Sytek Services, Inc.
Milwaukee, WI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Catch the WAVV! Stay for Requirements and the Free for All!
Update your S/390 skills in 4 days for a very reasonable price.
WAVV 2003 in Winston-Salem, NC.
April 25-29, 2003
For details see http://www.wavv.org
Re: Another distribution question
There are lots of examples of customers using DB2 on Linux for S/390. Feel free to contact me for more information. One of the largest motivating factors involved in getting vendors to port their code to Linux for S/390 is customers. Jim Elliott can certainly tell you if and when, but if it isn't there yet, contact IBM and make a formal request. On Tuesday 26 November 2002 07:52 am, you wrote: > All, > > I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another question > or two. > > This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready > to > put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent > applications > to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is > certified > to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that mean it is certified on > run > on that distribution regardless of the underlying hardware platform? > > For example, I want to put up DB2-Connect, and on IBM's z/Series Linux > page it says that V7.2 is certified to run on SuSe Linux at kernel 2.4, > etc. > However, we would also like to do INFORMIX, and there is a version for > Linux(but not listed as z/Series ready). Will this run on Linux on the > mainframe? Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix > System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where > it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that > there > are not enough apps available yet. > > Granted, I'm not up to speed yet, but I thought a distribution of Linux > was > just that regardless of the platform, and the the application would run > anywhere that distribution ran(i.e. binary compatible). > > Can you guys shed some light? > > Thanks, Dave > > __ > Dave Jousma > Lead Systems Administrator - Information Technology > Spartan Stores, Inc. > PO Box 8700 > Grand Rapids, MI 49518 > (616) 878-2883 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Rich Smrcina Sytek Services, Inc. Milwaukee, WI [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Catch the WAVV! Stay for Requirements and the Free for All! Update your S/390 skills in 4 days for a very reasonable price. WAVV 2003 in Winston-Salem, NC. April 25-29, 2003 For details see http://www.wavv.org
