Index

Subject : Re: LUG: CPLEX on Ubuntu: redhat or suse binary?

From : Brian Cottingham <spiffytech@gmail.[redacted]>

Date : Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:53:20 -0400

Parent

Surprising, but true! Suse is a textbook example of organic growth. The company started out just writing manuals and shipping copies of Slackware. Eventually they decided to make their own German translation of Slackware. Then they decided to spin off in their own direction because Slackware didn't meet their needs. They also developed YaST and brought in RPM to solve problems, too, until we arrive at today's SLES/SLED/openSUSE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUSE_Linux_distributions#The_origins

-Brian


On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Alex Poulos < apviper@gmail.[redacted] > wrote:
SLES came from Slackware?  I always assumed it came from redhat since it used RPMs.

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Brian Cottingham < spiffytech@gmail.[redacted] > wrote:
RHEL, SLES, and Ubuntu are all long-since derived from different distros (RHEL from RH, SLES from Slackware, Ubuntu from Debian) with no common heritage. RHEL and SLES both have heavy customization to their software stacks as well, so they're even divergent on a system organization level.

If either binary works on your system, use it, but I don't see a reason to choose one over the other based on similarity to Ubuntu.

-Brian



On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Daniel Underwood < daniel.underwood@ncsu.[redacted] > wrote:
Hello Folks,

IBM's ILOG CPLEX for x64 linux contains binaries built for 2 different
systems:

x86-64_rhel4.0_3.4
x86-64_sles9.0_3.3

Both of them seem to work on Ubuntu 9.10, but I'm wondering if either of
the systems are closer than the other to Ubuntu (Debian)?  If so, it
seems reasonable to use the binary built for the more similar base
system.

Thanks,
Daniel

--
Daniel Underwood
North Carolina State University
Graduate Student - Operations Research
email: daniel.underwood@ncsu.[redacted]
phone: XXX.302.3291
web: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~djunderw/