The migration would move accelerator control computers out of the Red Hat ecosystem.
  • oce 🐆@jlai.luEnglish
    36·
    2 months ago

    The reason is old hardware support:

    The reason for all that was a compiler flag. When Red Hat builds RHEL, it picks a minimum CPU generation the software will run on. RHEL 9’s cutoff already excludes CERN’s oldest boards, the kind running chips like Intel’s old Core 2 Duo, which comprises about 47 percent of their fleet.

    RHEL 10 raises that cutoff again, and this time even newer Ivy Bridge-generation boards, another 17 percent, fall on the wrong side of it.

    • 0x4f1@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      Core 2 Duo, wow! Present day raspberry pi is likely faster and much more power efficient. Not to mention security considerations.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      The LHC was completed in 08. That chip was sold from 06 to 12. This means basically half the pc’s they bought ~15 years ago are still meeting their needs.

      Honestly, this is the way it should be. The only reason most enterprises upgrade their computers is because Microslop, and all the other proprietary software they’ve allowed themselves to grow dependent on, require it; not because a 20 year old computer isn’t snappy on Debian, or isn’t powerful enough for email, docs, and browsing. The LHC requires supercomputers and server farms for primary operations. These pc’s are basically just thin clients to access those resources.

      There are still a shocking amount of Windows XP and 7 systems in production, because the software stack doesn’t need to be updated. If those systems had been deployed on linux 20 years ago, they would still be fully capable of receiving security updates.

      • UndergroundParking@lemmy.cafeEnglish
        01·
        2 months ago

        The only reason most enterprises upgrade their computers is because Microslop

        Honestly - not true. It’s compliance. Compliance says you need to be insured, insurance says you need to have vendor support, vendor says sorry, your old shit is out of support.

    • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      0·
      2 months ago

      I mean they could have just picked Debian 12… I doubt Debian will make retroactive slop updates to older versions of the distro. At least that’s what I’m doing on the systems I administer: set up a custom package that conflicts with base-files >= 13 and with some already-known slopified version numbers (thanks to Open Slopware) to keep things a bit more under control.