I vote for SMELL
;)
Burke, S (Stephen) wrote:
> How about ELF - Enterprise Linux Family? ;)
> S "what's all this html mail" B
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* LHC Computer Grid - Rollout
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Templon
> *Sent:* 23 February 2005 12:59
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [LCG-ROLLOUT] OS tag proposal (was unambig CE tags)
>
> Hi,
>
> I think if people agree with the principle, we could even fill in
> the values by hand if we like; we can get Fermi to fix their lsb
> tool out of band. What should I start publishing: GEL? EL? ELC
> (hey you hosers, take off eh?)? Or SMELL:
>
> Smell's Moreorless Enterprise Linux Like
>
> J "ouch that stunk" T
>
> On Feb 23, 2005, at 13:41, LEROY Christine DAPNIA wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> But with the Fermi SL the -i and -r option will not work :
>
>
> [root@node05 rc3.d]# /usr/bin/lsb_release -a
>
> LSB Version: 1.3
>
> *Distributor ID: n/a*
>
> Description: Scientific Linux SL Release 3.0.3 (SL)
>
> Release: n/a
>
> Codename: n/a
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : LHC Computer Grid - Rollout
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Kostas
> Koumantaros
> Envoyé : mercredi 23 février 2005 13:39
> À : [log in to unmask]
> Objet : Re: [LCG-ROLLOUT] OS tag proposal (was unambig CE tags)
>
>
> Sound Great,
>
> and if We automate Dist ID and Release It would be perfect
>
> :)
>
>
> Kostas
>
>
>
> Jeff Templon wrote:
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> >
>
> > the /usr/bin/lsb_release -i -r idea from Kostas seems to have
>
> > potential. The only thing that is missing is some generic
> tag, since
>
> > SL and CentOS are really two derivatives of RHEL. Perhaps we
> could do
>
> > the following:
>
> >
>
> > name: EL for enterprise Linux, RHC red hat classic numbering
> scheme,
>
> > etc.
>
> > version: the "distributor ID" as provided by
> /usr/bin/lsb_release -i
>
> > release: the release number as provided by
> /usr/bin/lsb_release -i -r
>
> >
>
> > Here is the output I got from four systems, along with what
> the Glue
>
> > Schema would contain if we go with the above proposal:
>
> >
>
> > lxplus.cern.ch
>
> > Distributor ID: ScientificCERN
>
> > Release: 3.0.3
>
> >
>
> > Name: EL
>
> > Version: ScientificCERN
>
> > Release: 3.0.3
>
> > ==================================
>
> >
>
> > tbn20.nikhef.nl (our new CE)
>
> > Distributor ID: CentOS
>
> > Release: 3.3
>
> >
>
> > Name: EL
>
> > Version: CentOS
>
> > Release: 3.3
>
> > ===================================
>
> >
>
> > juno.nikhef.nl (my desktop)
>
> > Distributor ID: RedHat
>
> > Release: 7.3
>
> >
>
> > Name: RHC
>
> > Version: RedHat
>
> > Release: 7.3
>
> > ===================================
>
> >
>
> > my laptop
>
> > dhcp-122:~ templon$ /usr/bin/lsb_release -i -r
>
> > -bash: /usr/bin/lsb_release: No such file or directory
>
> >
>
> > [ oh well ]
>
> >
>
> > dhcp-122:~ templon$ uname -a
>
> > Darwin dhcp-122.nikhef.nl 7.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 7.8.0:
> Wed Dec 22
>
> > 14:26:17 PST 2004; root:xnu/xnu-517.11.1.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC
> Power
>
> > Macintosh powerpc
>
> >
>
> > Name: BSD
>
> > Version: Apple
>
> > Release: 10.3.8
>
> >
>
> > What do people think??? Thanks Kostas for an interesting idea.
>
> >
>
> > JT
>
> >
>
> > On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:36, Kostas Georgiou wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> $ /usr/bin/lsb_release -a
>
> >> LSB Version: 1.2.0
>
> >> Distributor ID: RedHat
>
> >> Description: Red Hat Linux release 7.3 (Valhalla)
>
> >> Release: 7.3
>
> >> Codename: Valhalla
>
> >>
>
> >> Kostas
>
> >
>
|