SLE11 SP2 will be available at December 2011/January 2012.[/color]
Is there anywhere that lists what’s going to be included in SP2?
Specifically, I’m interested in better SSD support. SLES/SLED is the
only enteprise release that currently doesn’t support kernel-based TRIM
(and also doesn’t offer ext4 as an installable default) … and I’m a bit
uncomfortable running wiper.sh given the warnings it throws out about
silently destrying data,etc.
Would love to see Google Chrome 13 support, since the Chrome team has
mentioned that they already set the bar too high on dependancies and
will not be re-releasing Chrome 12 so I can run it in SLED11 SP1.
Would love to see Google Chrome 13 support[/color]
I doubt Google Chrome is a consideration given that it’s not included
in SLED. Also at the pace Google increase the major version number
they’ll be on 15 or 16 by the time SP2 arrives. If various libraries get
updated as they did between SLED 11 and SLED 11 SP1 it’s seems
reasonable to be optimistic that Google Chrome will work on SLED 11 SP2
though.
If you want Google Chrome now it might be possible to build the
relevant missing dependencies and run Chrome via a wrapper that sets
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to reference them. I did this once years ago to get
Firefox 3 working on SLED 10. It was… interesting…
I doubt Google Chrome is a consideration given that it’s not included in
SLED. Also at the pace Google increase the major version number they’ll
be on 15 or 16 by the time SP2 arrives.[/color]
And Firefox will be at version 9 by January 2012. Both of these
browsers are going a little nuts with the updates. It’ll be interesting
to see how SUSE handles this moving forward. Perhaps dedicated browser
repos like we have for ATI/nVidia? Considering Google’s only going to be
'supporting the last current and last major revision ’
(http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2011/06/our-plans-to-support-modern-browsers.html)of
every browser, having an up to date browser is going to be important for
any customers subscribing to Google Apps.
mikewillis;2135867 Wrote:[color=blue]
If you want Google Chrome now it might be possible to build the relevant
missing dependencies and run Chrome via a wrapper that sets
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to reference them. I did this once years ago to get
Firefox 3 working on SLED 10. It was… interesting… :)[/color]
That’s not a bad idea. I wonder if pre-built libraries could be nicked
from the OpenSUSE packages and loaded in this method.
And Firefox will be at version 9 by January 2012. Both of these browsers
are going a little nuts with the updates. It’ll be interesting to see
how SUSE handles this moving forward. Perhaps dedicated browser repos
like we have for ATI/nVidia?[/color]
So long as library dependencies don’t change to versions higher than
what are in SLED I don’t see why it would be a problem, at least not
from a technical perspective. Novell/SUSE have always had to package up
newer versions of Firefox as and when Mozilla release them. Even if the
library dependencies do change it’s not insurmountable. Novell did end
up updating Firefox in SLED 10 to version 3 despite it requiring a newer
version of GTK than was included in SLED 10. They solved the problem by
producing an additional package that provided the required version of
GTK without interfering with the version already in SLED 10.
Whether people who use SLED consider the rapidly escalating Firefox
major version number to be a problem is another matter. All the
complaints I can recall seeing about the new release schedule are about
the rapid incrementing of major version number when the actual changes
are quite minor. If you’re an administrator concerned about
compatibility with some system or enforcing default or mandatory
settings, traditionally you can pretty much ignore minor version number
changes in terms of testing. When a new major version number comes along
once a year or so, you know this indicates significant changes and you
need to take a good look at it. When the major version number is being
incremented every time someone at Mozilla sneezes you lose that
indication of how significant the changes in the latest version actually
are. There’s also the issue of at what point the version numbers start
to look silly. “What version of Firefox are you using?” “43” “OK, well
that’s six weeks old now, you need to update to version 44”.
