Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > And I only mentioned that the Linux part is homogeneous. Ever wondered > why the majority of Unix admins that have skills in managing > heterogeneous Unix system have a physicist's background? It is far > more important to have a good mips/$ and some scientists on salary, > than to spend all budget for the IT staff's system management. If you are spending all the budget for IT staff to do system management, you're doing it wrong; there's no reason that systems management should be on the par you're talking about. There are places that run hundreds to thousands of machines with a single administrator. Honestly? It sounds like a vicious cycle of "we don't think we have the time to set up a consistent platform, so we don't, so we have to spend too much time managing it, so we don't have the time to set up a new platform..." > > If you want consistent results, run a consistent platform. > > So you outrule Fedora? Because consistent means even more than a > stable API/ABI, RHEL comes close to that, but switching to RHEL > because a distro does not want to offer static libs is not reason > enough, especially in light of development of key components like > gfortran that is reflected in RHEL only a couple years after it makes > it into the non-enterprise platforms. RHEL doesn't even *ship* this scientific stuff, for a large part. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't continue to support this sort of fundamentally-unsupportable setup ad nauseam - it's time to think about how to solve this in a sane manner, rather than continuing to paper over the problem. I don't see how, at a minium, moving the static libraries to -static packages changes things - if, as you say, everyone just chucks libraries manually in /usr/local, then how is this making anything worse for them? Bill -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
