My daily readings 07/11/2011

  • tags: Box enterprise

    • The way successful enterprise software companies have historically operated has been more or less uncontested: licensing costs increase at regular intervals, technology is difficult to integrate, and the user experience is often atrocious. Unlike most other open markets, which force out negative behaviors over time, many of the practices in place today serve the vendor and customer asymmetrically. Amazingly, more than 40% of IT projects still fail to deliver the expected business ROI, yet enterprise vendors come out winning regardless.
    • t Box, we now see RFPs where “user adoption” is a heavily weighted factor in the purchasing decision; this was virtually unheard of a few years ago. IT managers are realizing that there are better, more strategic uses of their time than training employees, fighting low adoption, and contending with angry users – they want technology that just works. And because of this, we’re seeing more alignment between users and the CIO than ever before.

       

  • tags: CentOS Sysadmin

    • I have about the same time in Linux as you but how I found out about SL was due to the delays CentOS has been having. Previously, the CentOS releases were not far behind RHEL releases as far as timing. But when 6.0 failed to show up I visited the CentOS forum.

      For whatever reason that only the internal developers know, announced milestone after milestone were delayed. The chief complaint about CentOS has been the lack of openness or transparency with the devs. Numerous offers to help and contribute to the project have not been accepted. With little feedback or request for help, users became antsy if the CentOS project was dead in the water. That’s where Scientific Linux seemed to have found some new users when they were the first out of the gate with a version 6 based on RHEL.

      While it’s great that CentOS 6.0 is out, maybe the better question is to ask why not 6.1 which was already released by RHEL some time ago (May 19th) that addresses some security issues.

      I used CentOS quite a bit but have moved off to distributions as I’m happy to pay for some software and contribute to other ecosystems where there is an openness to them.

    • The “lag” you speak of actually can be thought of as a feature. For example, you don’t want doing a ‘yum upgrade’ to upgrade PHP from 5.2 to 5.3 and break software you are running. You want your core operating system to actually be fairly stable, and not have to worry about upgrades randomly breaking things.

      When it comes down to it, you really don’t need the latest and greatest software on a server. Aside from security fixes, there’s very little reason to upgrade software on a server just because a new version was released.

    • A 9 month lag behind RHEL is a feature? You are either misunderstanding something or just trolling.
    • Too late. Already replicated created Scientific Linux 6 cobbler repos and have started deploying.

      SL seems to be much more on top of things than CentOS these days, and it was incredibly frustrating waiting for CentOS to release 6.

  • tags: CentOS Sysadmin

    • We have decided not to follow the UOP’s usage of Installation Codes. All ‘channels’ are available to the System Administrator at time of installation.
      • 4. Known Issues

         

        • The installer needs at least 392MB of memory to work. Text mode will automatically be used if the system has less than 652MB of memory.
        • The text installer has limited capabilities compared to the GUI installer. Most notably there is no support for configuring partition layout, storage methods or package selection. Please refer to the official documentation for details.

        • The message “Insufficient memory to configure kdump!” appears during install. This is a known upstream bug which appears on systems with less than 4 GB RAM and solved by updating to kexec-tools-2_0_0-153_el6 or newer.

        • Content for x86_64 is split into two DVDs. The second disk contains only packages from upstream’s “Optional” channel. Installs not requiring any of the packages from the “Optional” category should run using only DVD#1.
        • The i386 DVD is just a bit too large to fit on normal single layer DVD+R media. It can be burnt succesfully on DVD-R.
  • tags: CentOS Sysadmin

    • Since upstream has a 6.1 version already released, we will be using a  Continous Release repository for 6.0 to bring all 6.1 and post 6.1  security updates to all 6.0 users, till such time as CentOS-6.1 is  released itself. There will be more details about this posted within the  next 48 hours.
    • Upgrading from CentOS-4 or CentOS-5:  We recommend everyone run through a reinstall rather than attempt an  inplace upgrade from CentOS-4 or CentOS-5
    • The LightWeightServer (LWS) CD  In order to bring back the CentOS-4 Server CD style single iso image, we  are creating a LWS varient of the main distro. Details for this will be  posted in the next few days with release happening after the live media  and the minimal cd editions.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: