IBM says the channel is in dire need of more professionals with mainframe server administration expertise, and just in time for the new school year, it is promoting a partnership with the Linux Foundation, Marist College and Syracuse University to deliver those skills through a new series of MOOCs on open source operating systems.
Your new app is brilliant; the code you’ve spent six months writing is beautiful. But when you upload it from your laptop to the web server, it just doesn’t work. You know why: your laptop’s is configured slightly differently than the server, and now you’re now going to have to spend hours — maybe days — figuring out what you need to change to make it run properly.
In April, Red Hat released Project Atomic, a prototype system for running Docker containers. This is Red Hat’s response to the interest in CoreOS a system for hosting Docker containers based on ChromeOS.
Project Atomic is not intended to be another operating system; Red Hat already has RHEL, Fedora and now CentOS, so a fourth OS would not make much sense. Instead it is currently a prototype using Fedora, with a CentOS version slated to come soon, not yet a production product.
It wasn’t always that way. Whizz back to 1998 when Linux was still clawing its way out of the primordial binary ooze and just a single supercomputer ran it. Jump forward six years and that figure had exploded to 291 of the top-500 supercomputers and Linux never looked back. Now, I’m no expert (we could probably stop the sentence there) in supercomputers, but the benefits of a GNU/Linux OS apply as much to your home user as they do to supercomputer manufacturers. There’s no per-core licence to worry about – which becomes a big worry if you have 3.1 million processors to power.
Should you deploy Linux on the mainframe?
There are plenty of positives and negatives that make it clear that a Linux mainframe isn't right for all IT shops. Two experts go head to head on how to decide what's right for your data center: Linux workloads on a mainframe or running them in a distributed server environment.
Let me start by saying this is absolutely not a Docker bashing article. I actually love Docker, and I think it is an outstanding piece of software that will have great success. But I have to confess, I’m not sure that it deserves the virtualization moniker that so many in the industry are hanging on it.
There's no denying the power and utility value of the cloud. We all use it and it's certainly something that most Linux users can appreciate. However, I disagree with the basic premise of the article that Linux "Linux needs...a major win in the desktop arena." Why? Linux is alive and well, and doing just fine without having tons of desktop market share.
I'm not sure where this obsession with market share comes from, but I think it's an altogether unhealthy thing. And it's particularly bad when you consider that mobile devices have been chipping away steadily at desktop usage across all platforms. I'd much rather see Linux offer more mobile device options than trying to go on some quixotic quest to gain desktop market share when most users are moving away from the desktop anyway.
The author uses Chromebooks as an example, and I can understand his affection for them. For what they do they are fine computing devices, and their popularity can't be questioned at this point (as always see Amazon's list of bestselling laptops to see just how popular they are right now). But we already have Chromebooks, so why do we need a Linux "cloudbook?"
Oracle has this month introduced the Oracle-flavoured Linux 7 open source operating system. Freely distributed under the GNU General Public License (GPLv2), Oracle Linux is based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and follows the RHEL7 release, which arrived this June.
This distribution of Linux represents what Oracle would like to us to consider as its more open and community focused side, although of course a paid support model is available and widely adopted.
As usual, any new version of MySQL brings lots of improvements, and the current build is also quite large. Users will find that numerous changes have been made and some of them are quite interesting.
“The linked OpenSSL library for the MySQL 5.6 Commercial Server has been updated from version 1.0.1g to version 1.0.1h. Versions of OpenSSL prior to and including 1.0.1g are reported to be vulnerable to CVE-2014-0224. This change does not affect the Oracle-produced MySQL Community build of MySQL Server 5.6, which uses the yaSSL library instead,” notes the changelog.