On Aug 24, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Jeff Templon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
>
>> 2) IIRC correctly there was a decision not to pressure sites to
>> migrate
>> from lcg-CE soon
>> Does that mean that many sites will have to choose between running
>> critical nodes with either an unsupported OS(SLC3) or unsupported
>> middleware in November ?? Please tell me I'm missing something ....
>
> Yes :-) Putting on my TCG site representative hat now, I can tell
> you that at CERN there has already been reasonable success at
> running the lcg-CE on a RHEL-4 based OS (in this case SLC4). The
> TCG has also taken the strategic decision to capitalize on this
> effort and make a RHEL-4 lcg-CE an official priority. For exactly
> the reason you underline above.
>
> It was originally hoped that a replacement CE would be production
> ready in time for the SL3 end-of-life but this is not the case.
>
Note this is the SLC3 end of life not SL3 end of life which still has
another two or even 3 years for security updates at least.
https://www.scientificlinux.org/distributions/roadmap
> There is no definitive agreement on how long the RHEL4 lcg-CE will
> be supported, but at least until the new CE is production ready;
> the most optimistic estimate I have heard is six months.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> JT
--
Steve Traylen
Work Calendar: http://tinyurl.com/22lw9o
[log in to unmask]
CERN, IT-GD-OPS.
|