 |
 |
Hi, I think this problem is more-or-less exactly what Kostas had in mind in his contribution to the OS Name debate: > So if understand you correctly you should not even have to care about > the tag. Because something is called RHEL3 or FC3 it doesn't mean that > it has the version of glibc/limxml or whatever else that you need. > > I think it will be much better if you can provide a list of requirements > that your experiment needs and we can make sure that if we support your > experiment the requirements are there. > > Since we are all supposed to have binary compatibility with RHEL there > are many ways that you can provide such a list. For example an rpm > with requires for your software: > > rpm -q experiment-system-support --requires > libc.so.6() > libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5) > libperl.so() > libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5) > perl >= 1:5.8.0 > perl(Getopt::Std) > /bin/bash > libqt-mt.so.3() > libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) > beecrypt >= 3.0.1 > > With something like that me as a sysadmin i can easilly check and install > automatically everything from the base system that you need and publish that > as a tag. If the tag is there you *know* that the software that you require > is available and you only have to worry about binary compatibility which in > theory *is* there. > > Cheers, > Kostas This doesn't require sysadmins to have preinstalled specific packages as a baseline, but if these packages are required by an experiment, then such a missing package can be specified and installed in this way. And VO's won't have to install missing packages in their own software area! There didn't seem to be any response Kostas suggestion: to me it sounds like a very good idea... Burke, S (Stephen) wrote: > 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 > -- ======================================================= Dr O J E Maroney # London Tier 2 Technical Co-ordinator Tel. (+44)20 759 47802 Imperial College London High Energy Physics Department The Blackett Laboratory Prince Consort Road, London, SW7 2BW ====================================