http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=879491 On Apr 20, 2012 7:42 PM, "Richard Forth" <richard.fo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If your interested I got some more background into why SL was recommended > over CentOS. > > Basically CentOS as a project is imploding, due to a lack of money and > developers, largely due to an insider fraud, and word on IRC channels is > that CentOS will be dead by the end of the year. > > Because all the developers bar about 3 people left the project, updates > are slow to virtually non existent, and that CentOS hack around with the > core RHEL code too much to call it a true standards compliant RHEL rebuild. > > Scientific Linux has the backing of major scientific institutions like > CERN, plus a few other major petro-chemical companies. They do keep > standards compliant RHEL apparently there are only about 6 extra packages, > and the change of logos, that makes it Scientific. You can opt not to have > the sciencey packages installed and you basically have RHEL for free. > > That's about the size of it. > > Rich > On Apr 19, 2012 2:21 PM, "Martin Nix" <mar...@nixes.net> wrote: > >> That makes sense actually, thinking back I got my qualification on RHEL5 >> (just before 6 came out) & that was all single DVD >> >> On 19 April 2012 14:12, Richard Forth <richard.fo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Personally, it's not mine either, but that was on 5. Looking at the >>> CentOS 6 downloads I can see 2x dvd downloads. Decided to go with the SL >>> recommendation this time. Seems alright. >>> On Apr 19, 2012 12:27 PM, "Martin Nix" <mar...@nixes.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Not my experience of Centos I have to say - not sure where he got that >>>> from, all the centos releases I've installed have been sub 1 DVD and not >>>> bloated at all (unless you aren't particularly choosy about what you >>>> include in the install selection) >>>> >>>> I prepared for my RHCE using a RHEL VM and Centos VM side by side and >>>> it was totally sufficient (not saying that Scientific isn't BTW) >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> On 19 April 2012 10:38, Richard Forth <richard.fo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Instructor recommended it over CentOS apparently full CentOS is >>>>> bloatware and is split over 2 DVD'S where as actual RHEL is less than 1 >>>>> DVD. Scientific is closer to original RHEL 6.0, even tho both are rebuilds >>>>> of RHEL 6 source. >>>>> On Apr 19, 2012 9:07 AM, "COX Derek" <derek....@alstom.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Good luck with the exam. I did RHCT and RHCE a couple of years ago >>>>>> and RHCE was tough >>>>>> >>>>>> One curiosity, why scientific rather than centos ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* peterboro-boun...@mailman.lug.org.uk [mailto: >>>>>> peterboro-boun...@mailman.lug.org.uk] *On Behalf Of *Richard Forth >>>>>> *Sent:* 18 April 2012 23:33 >>>>>> *To:* Peterborough LUG - No commercial posts >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Peterboro] Kernel Panic in anaconda Scientific Linux >>>>>> INSTALL [fixed] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok, I have an "interesting" update on this. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So the KP I reported below is NOT to do with the second core being >>>>>> started, it just so happened that after I stopped the second core as per >>>>>> a >>>>>> bugzilla report I read somewhere as I slowly went insane, the installer >>>>>> decided randomly to complete. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The next problem I encountered was copying a 3.9Gb file from usb to >>>>>> my home area, basically my aim is to build a kvm hypervisor to practice >>>>>> for >>>>>> my RHCSA exam. This explains the 3.9Gb file, being the DVD image of SL6.0 >>>>>> to be used for the vm kicks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> about halfway through this file copy i got another kernel panic, >>>>>> which, after a few attempts, actually corrupted the lvm volume forcing me >>>>>> to rekick (again) that failed randomly numerous times so I decided just >>>>>> to >>>>>> test, I'd rekick the box with Mint10 which I knew installed fine >>>>>> previously, that kernel panicked as well....this is ODD...... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> THE MORAL OF THE STORY >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Remember what has physically changed (I installed new memory modules) >>>>>> ....<< yeah i forgot that bit.. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Took out the new modules, and mint booted fine, no problems, no >>>>>> kernel panics. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> To test also that it wasnt hard drive related, I created a large file >>>>>> with the follwoing command (dont run this) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=1024 >>>>>> count=[replacethiswithverybignumber] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I control-C'ed at nearly 9Gig so that was all good, deleted the file >>>>>> "bigfile" >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> after install I shutdown the computer, took out the old GOOD ram, and >>>>>> replaced it with the new BAD ram, but remember I dont know this for sure >>>>>> (yet) its just a theory. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I booted into mint's grub menu, and found Memtest86+ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I ran that and, so far, as of this writing, it has counted 5 million >>>>>> + errors, every address has failed so far, no passes. Zero. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That probably explains the kernel panics now. You wont believe how >>>>>> many rekicks I've done over the last 48 hours on this damn thing, I swear >>>>>> my hair line has receeded a further inch just since yesterday, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So in conclusion, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Was it actually the second core causing SL6 to blue screen? Probably >>>>>> not. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Should you always run Memtest86+ on new memory modules? YES always!! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Should you beat a dead horse for 48 hours before realising is >>>>>> probably is actually dead instead of doing something simple like check >>>>>> its >>>>>> pulse, first? Absolutely >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Do I feel like a pratt? Definately. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Lol, night folks, hope this was entertaining and informative. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - Rich >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18 April 2012 14:26, Richard Forth <richard.fo...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Just to warn everyone of an issue in RHEL 6.0 (Scientific Linux 6), >>>>>> where mke2fs on lvm filesystem causes kernel panic, the solution was to >>>>>> turn off one of the cores in bios in a Core2 duo machine. After this, >>>>>> setup >>>>>> finished with no errors, I was also able to turn on the second core after >>>>>> the reboot when installation finished, with no errors. >>>>>> >>>>>> This may or may not be useful but worth putting out there. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Rich >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY : This e-mail and any attachments are confidential >>>>>> and may be privileged. If you are not a named recipient, please notify >>>>>> the >>>>>> sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, >>>>>> use >>>>>> it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Peterboro mailing list >>>>>> Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk >>>>>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Peterboro mailing list >>>>> Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk >>>>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peterboro mailing list >>>> Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk >>>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peterboro mailing list >>> Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk >>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peterboro mailing list >> Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk >> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro >> >
_______________________________________________ Peterboro mailing list Peterboro@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro
