scientificlinuxforum.org QR code
Scientific Linux Forum.org



  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Scientific Linux, the Great Distro ...
toracat
 Posted: Mar 23 2012, 10:58 PM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Member No.: 11
Joined: 10-April 11









... With the Wrong Name biggrin.gif

A very nice review about Scientific Linux appeared here.

Be sure to read the bottom line:
QUOTE

The community support is good and mostly free of irritating people, and it's well-maintained and rock-solid.



--------------------
ELRepo: repository specializing in hardware support for EL
PMUsers Website
^
wearetheborg
 Posted: Mar 24 2012, 05:01 AM
Quote Post


SLF Advocate
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 355
Member No.: 18
Joined: 11-April 11









But its not exactly a clone, it doesnt maintain 100% binary compatibility with RHEL unlike CentOS.

ANyone know what do they change? With RH not providing the detalls of their changes in updates, it was supposed to make making changes to their sources harder. How does SL bypass this hurdle?


--------------------
PM
^
toracat
 Posted: Mar 24 2012, 01:02 PM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Member No.: 11
Joined: 10-April 11









QUOTE (wearetheborg @ Mar 23 2012, 09:01 PM)
But its not exactly a clone, it doesnt maintain 100% binary compatibility with RHEL unlike CentOS.

CentOS is not 100% binary compatible with RHEL. Both Scientific Linux and CentOS aim to be 100% binary compatible but neither is perfect. If I am asked which distro does it better, I would say, "they are equally good".


--------------------
ELRepo: repository specializing in hardware support for EL
PMUsers Website
^
Nathan
 Posted: Mar 24 2012, 02:54 PM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 288
Member No.: 928
Joined: 15-October 11









The author clearly does not understand the point of Scientific Linux at all. Even though it is perfectly possible, this is not a distro intended to be used by the masses.
PM
^
wearetheborg
 Posted: Mar 25 2012, 01:24 AM
Quote Post


SLF Advocate
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 355
Member No.: 18
Joined: 11-April 11









QUOTE (toracat @ Mar 24 2012, 08:02 AM)

CentOS is not 100% binary compatible with RHEL.


Hmmm, I thought it was!


--------------------
PM
^
toracat
 Posted: Mar 25 2012, 12:46 PM
Quote Post


SLF Geek
****

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Member No.: 11
Joined: 10-April 11









QUOTE (wearetheborg @ Mar 24 2012, 05:24 PM)
QUOTE (toracat @ Mar 24 2012, 08:02 AM)

CentOS is not 100% binary compatible with RHEL.


Hmmm, I thought it was!

'100% binary compatibility' is practically impossible to achieve. This is in part because the build environment is not disclosed by upstream (understandably) and rebuilders must do some guessing or 'trial & error' work. Often times certain versions of packages that were never released are required for the building. I have provided some more explanaitons on the CentOS mailing list [1].

For example, in CentOS, the following issue has been identified [and subsequently fixed]:

http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4995

Definition of certain variables did not match TUV (because it is not known) causing incompatibility, and a number of packages needed rebuilding. FYI, this issue did not exist in SL-6.

[1] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-November/119250.html


--------------------
ELRepo: repository specializing in hardware support for EL
PMUsers Website
^
redman
 Posted: Mar 26 2012, 10:29 AM
Quote Post


SLF Admin
********

Group: Admins
Posts: 1977
Member No.: 2
Joined: 8-April 11









QUOTE (wearetheborg @ Mar 24 2012, 07:01 AM)
ANyone know what do they change? With RH not providing the detalls of their changes in updates, it was supposed to make making changes to their sources harder. How does SL bypass this hurdle?

All changes made are documented in the release notes.


--------------------
What is SL? - Forum Rules - Info on 3rd Party Repos - How to post images - How to post large text / config files

Desktop: ASUS P5QPL-AM, Intel Dual-Core E6500, 4GB DDR2, ASUS GeForce GT 430 1GB, SL6.5 x86_64
Laptop: ASUS X58L, Intel Dual-Core T3200, 3GB DDR2, Intel GMA X3100, RHEL7.0 x86_64
Test box: Intel S5000PSL, 2x Intel Xeon E5310, 8GB ECC DDR2 FB-DIMM, ASUS GeForce GT 220 1GB, RHEL7 RC x86_64
PMEmail Poster
^
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll