Hi Stephen,
As I said on the previous thread last week, from the point of
view of the experiments it would be nice to get this issue well defined.
What system software is installed on the WN under a given OS tag? This
need to be clearly defined somewhere and some "reference" machines
should be available for us to test.
In any other case, we will need to take a "just in case"
approach and let every job install in its own area all the software
(+libraries, even system ones) that it might need.
Again I think this solution is not scalable so trying to get an
agreement on the minimum requirements seems to me a "must" if we ever
want to achieve a production system.
Notice that the problem will become even worst when not just
"RedHat" like system get involved.
Regards
Ricardo
=======================================================================
========
Ricardo Graciani Diaz
Dept. Estructura i Constituents de la Materia
Facultat de Fisica Tel: +34 93 403 9183
Universitat de Barcelona Fax: +34 93 402 1198
Diagonal, 647
E-08028 Barcelona
=======================================================================
========
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: LHC Computer Grid - Rollout [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
En
> nombre de Burke, S (Stephen)
> Enviado el: martes, 01 de marzo de 2005 14:49
> Para: [log in to unmask]
> Asunto: [LCG-ROLLOUT] What can you expect to come with the OS?
>
> Hi *,
>
> I'd like to extend the discussion about OS names to the question of
what
> packages are assumed to be installed. Yesterday I was a bit surprised
to
> find that the RAL installation of SL does not come with a C++ compiler
> installed by default; also atlas apparently found that some other
> gcc-related packages were installed in some places and not others.
Steve
> Traylen tells me that sites decide individually what to install, and
> that if VOs need particular packages they need to ask sites to do it.
It
> seems to me that this is not a very scalable solution, at least for
> something as basic as a compiler, and that there should be some
> agreement on what should be there by default. If we don't get
agreement
> I suspect we'll be back to the situation where VOs have to install
> pretty much everything in their own software area because they won't
be
> able to rely on anything ...
>
> Stephen
|