| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Red Hat version for WMQ FTE V7.0.1? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| TonyD |
 Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:17 pm Post subject: Red Hat version for WMQ FTE V7.0.1? |
 |
|
Knight
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 540
Location: New Zealand
|
The system requirements listing for FTE V7.0.1 Linux for System z 64-bit states 'Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) V5.0'. No '...or higher'!
Does this mean that the System z product is not supported on later RHEL versions, i.e. 5.3, 5.4?
Similarly Red Hat is not even listed for System x 64-bit? Only SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) V11 is listed.
Any comments re the above would be appreciated as we are on RHEL 5.3 and are about to install FTE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
You are comparing apples and oranges. Linux for system Z is a mainframe product. 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| TonyD |
| Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 540
Location: New Zealand
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| You are comparing apples and oranges. Linux for system Z is a mainframe product. |
Not sure I understand your point? We have x86 and zSeries and want to install FTE on both, but we are currently on Red Hat 5.3 on both platforms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Sorry, my apologies, I must have misread then and this
must have been a typo and should read System z 64 bit right ?
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| TonyD |
| Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 540
Location: New Zealand
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
Sorry, my apologies, I must have misread then and this
must have been a typo and should read System z 64 bit right ? |
You are right ... my terminology was at fault. I should have said x86 64-bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeteVerdon |
| Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 33
Location: Hursley, UK
|
Hi guys,
At present our support statement lists platforms we have explicitly tested, so you and we can be certain they work. Clearly, however, it's not possible for us to test every single platform combination out there, so plenty of perfectly reasonable options are not on the list even though they would work fine. As a Java product we're somewhat insulated from the OS so I wouldn't expect to be particularly susceptible to minor platform variations anyway.
We're aware that this isn't ideal, and are trying to work out a better approach for the future (primarily a paperwork exercise rather than a technical one). However, there's always a tension between stating support for all the platforms people want to use and the nightmare scenario in which we have claimed support for something that should work but turns out to have an unexpected glitch meaning that it won't. We are then stuck between a promise to make it work, and the technical impossibility of doing so, possibly with very large sums of money at stake.
I haven't been involved in platform coverage testing, but my personal gut feeling (not IBM's formal position  ) is that what you want to do would work fine.
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
