Scyld and Red Hat 7
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Gerry Creager gerry at cs.tamu.eduWed Jan 31 15:42:14 PST 2001
- Previous message: Scyld and Red Hat 7
- Next message: Q: Any parallel DBs for the cluster computers ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ken wrote: > > Martin Siegert wrote: > > > 2. with respect to hardware support: most of that comes with the kernel, > > particularly everything that is loaded as modules (e.g., and NIC drivers). > > Hence, upgrading to a 2.4 kernel probably gets you better hardware > > support than upgrading to RH 7.0. > > > > I can agree with you in that since I upgraded to RH7 I've decided to use > Mandrake instead. ;-) > The original questions was about baseing the next release of Scyld in > RH7. It is hard to upgrade a distro that doesn't load in the first > place. If upgrading the kernel is enough, then that's fine. I can > think of plenty of reasons to keep the distro as simple and functional > as possible. While my experiences with Mandrake have generally been horror stories, my experiences with RH7 have been disasters of truly epic proportion. I've just about got RH7 tamed... as long as I don't mount my CDROM and use tcp/ip at the same time... and NO! I'm not kidding. I've stuck to RH6.2 for production. -- Gerry Creager | Never ascribe to Malice that AATLT | which can adequately be Texas A&M University | explained by Stupidity. 979.458.4020 (Phone) | -- Lazarus Long 979.847.8578 (Fax)
- Previous message: Scyld and Red Hat 7
- Next message: Q: Any parallel DBs for the cluster computers ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
