ubuntu 7.10, fedora 8

Discussion in 'Cadence' started by danmc, Dec 7, 2007.

  1. danmc

    danmc Guest

    has anyone tried running IC5141 or assura317 under either ubuntu 7.10
    or fedora 8? I know they aren't the supported OS's, but it would help
    if one of those worked.

    thanks
    -Dan
     
    danmc, Dec 7, 2007
    #1
  2. danmc

    mk Guest

    IC5141 works nicely on fedora 4 & 7. Haven't installed Fedora 8 yet
    but I doubt it will get worse.
     
    mk, Dec 7, 2007
    #2
  3. danmc

    Dan Guest

    I am running it on ubuntu 7.10 (fesity) on an amd64 box. ran fine,
    until I tried assura317 (libm.so.6 problems with avlck).
     
    Dan, Dec 7, 2007
    #3
  4. danmc

    andrewb Guest

    The Assura problems are caused by the fact that in the wrapper script
    for Assura it sets LD_ASSUME_KERNEL. There's a CCR open for this at
    the moment (CCR 509192) - I hit the same problem with RHEL5 (which is
    what I have on my laptop now).

    In order to get it to work, you should do:

    setenv NO_ASSUME_KERNEL " " # anything other than an empty string

    I also had to create a script in my installation because it broke
    somewhere else - I'm not certain whether this is absolutely necessary.

    Anyway, what I did was to create a script:

    <assuraInstDir>/share/bin/.cdnWrapper_dev

    with the line:

    unset LD_ASSUME_KERNEL

    Later Linux Kernels really don't like having LD_ASSUME_KERNEL set to
    2.4 - applications go horribly wrong as a results (even "ls").

    Andrew.
     
    andrewb, Dec 10, 2007
    #4
  5. Andrew,
    most of us know that the supported version of RHEL can be as old as
    RHEL3 for some of the Cadence applications. Problem is not Cadence,
    but the rest of the system. RHEL3 is horribly old. For us Linux users
    it is horror to have to work with 5 year old versions of a tool just
    because our bread and butter application demands it. We do use RHEL4
    as rumors tells us that it is ok, but the official roadmap for OS
    support is horrible.

    Knowing that key application personell at Cadence is using a far to
    new version of the OS make me a bit pissed. Why can't the rest of us
    also? I want a decent version of python installed, I want the newest
    version of vim installed. RHEL does not backport newer versions. I can
    compile my own versions, but soon the compiler on RHEL4 is going to be
    too old for some of the new tools. Why can't Cadence put some more
    effort into upping the support of more modern distributions? You know
    what is comming in RHEL if you look carefully at what Fedora is
    including. Operating system with built-in crystal ball.
     
    Svenn Are Bjerkem, Dec 12, 2007
    #5
  6. danmc

    andrewb Guest

    Actually we do now officially support RHEL4 for IC5141. That changed a
    few months ago. It's all to do with the effort of testing.

    Cadence has a regular internal platform update which determines the
    platform for new releases in a particular period. That sets the OS,
    compiler versions, and so on for use in any stream that is released
    during that period. Of course, it also defines a minimum release
    standard for customers too.

    We also have to balance the fact that customers don't want to update
    to a new OS all the time, but yet we have to be able to test on a
    manageable number of OS versions in a reasonable time. So the version
    a tool is built upon is led by the support timeline for that OS,
    together with the industry standards for the EDA industry (there's a
    link to this on the Cadence web site under platform support).

    Now, the fact that I happen to be using RHEL 5 is rather unusual; I'm
    rather ahead of the game. Most AEs are using RHEL3 or RHEL4 (in Europe
    it's probably mostly RHEL4 - again, that makes sense for newer
    releases, and in practice there's not been any compatibility
    problems).

    My using RHEL5 is partly so that I can take advantage of things like
    wireless drivers for my laptop, but also to be aware of any
    compatibility problems that customers might hit if they choose to use
    either RHEL5 or other unsupported distros based on the same kernel
    revision.

    So believe me, we are taking the effort - but it's a balance between
    the natural conservatism of customers, and practically being able to
    test things in a reasonable time with finite resources.

    Regards,

    Andrew.
     
    andrewb, Dec 13, 2007
    #6
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.