Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Magnus Hagander
Тема Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages
Дата
Msg-id CABUevEwn43uEBBvZ1VcoE2cQ5yA55LNQ4yUick9xT7+22w=z9Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages  (Lenz Grimmer <lenz@grimmer.com>)
Ответы Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages  (Lenz Grimmer <lenz@grimmer.com>)
Список pgsql-www
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Lenz Grimmer <lenz@grimmer.com> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:

> I don't believe it is. I see no problem in adding information about the
> Oracle linux distribution, just like we have information about Oracle
> Solaris. This is about providing a service to our users, after all.

Thank you, I appreciate your support. We have users that contacted us because
they want to run newer versions of PostgreSQL on OL. That's why I reached out to
this list.

> Now if Devrim doesn't want to spend time verifying the packages for Oracle
> Linux, that's of course his decision.

Absolutely.

> But we can certainly list what the distribution default is. But we could then specifically list under the
> section of "PostgreSQL Yum Repository" which distributions are supported there.

Yes, I think it's fine to make that distinction. The top part of
http://www.postgresql.org/download/linux/redhat/
first explains what versions of PG are included by default in which
versions of RHEL and its derivatives.
It then points to the yum repo, but without making a clear indication
which distributions have been tested
explicitly (and are thus considered "supported"?). If you go to
http://yum.postgresql.org/, it talks about
"available platforms", listing RHEL, CentOS and SL (among other
RPM-based distros).

> (Though in the end I think it would be beneficial to the users if we could
> support Oracle Linux as well, its always a matter of resources vs number of
> users. There are a lot of debian based distributions that aren't officially
> supported by our apt repository either, for example)

Right.

> In fact, we should probably list that there regardless - so people know
> which versions are actually supported by that repository. Should we perhaps
> even specifically list which versions of each distro?

For the RHEL-based distributions, I think it's sufficient to just
state the major version (e.g.
RHEL 6, CentOS 6, etc.) - the minor version (e.g. "6.5") just
indicates an update release, which is
primarily a consolidation of all updates/errate that have accumulated.
Each update release within
a major release is fully binary compatible (the ABI remains
unchanged). A version of PostgreSQL
build on RHEL 6.0 will still run on 6.5.


Does Oracle Linux use the same version numbering? Right now it's "RHEL/CentOS/SL 5" - is that equivalent of "Oracle Linux 5", and "RHEL/CentOS/SL 6" is equivalent of "Oracle Linux 6"?

What's the typical abbreviation used for Oracle Linux? OL? 


--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Lenz Grimmer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages
Следующее
От: Lenz Grimmer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Adding Oracle Linux to the Linux Download pages