Cadence Spectre and Virtuso on RedHat Linux 9.0

We are having difficulty installing Cadence 5.0 on Redhat Linux 9.0.
Cadence recomments 7.2 but we have hardware issues with 7.2.
Has anybody got it to work on 9.0 ?

Thanks,
Nathan

 

what kind of difficulty? Post the exact error message you are getting
to get help.

 

I did not try RH9, but the installation of IC5 went flawlessly for me
with Mandrake linux 9.2

For fixing your hardware problem, I d suggest you try whitebox linux
(a clone of RHEL) rather than RH9.

 

Yes we do, I work fine with except for some bug that exist in RH 7.1-3

You will need to add the env variable before it can work properly

setenv LD_ASSUME_KERNEL 2.4.1
setenv LANG C

 

Cadence needs the presence of the lock-Daemon, which (as far as I remember)
isn't included inv RedHat Linux 9.
We installed it on RedHat 8 without any difficulties, though.

Stefan

 

FWIW, we're currently running IC5033, SPR50-something and LDV41 on:

Red Hat Linux release 8.0 (Psyche)
Linux tux1 2.4.18-14 #1 Wed Sep 4 12:13:11 EDT 2002 i686 athlon i386
GNU/Linux

And now moving to:

SuSE Linux 9.0 (i586)
Linux concorde 2.4.21-144-default #1 Fri Nov 14 00:01:36 UTC 2003 i686
i686 i386 GNU/Linux

We're just starting to move to SuSE after seeing Redhat's shorter
and shorter support times for releases (RH9 support expires in 4/04
or something like that, right?).

-Jay-

 

We're just starting to move to SuSE after seeing Redhat's shorter

Did you do this in accordance with CDS ?

All EDA vendors will announce support for RHEL, and you will then have
a garantied 5 year support, but for a rather indecent price.

RHEL is a meaningful inverstment only for servers, and I wish cadence
would not recommend it for workstations.

A decent attitude would be to garanty support of RHEL, but also extend
the checks done by checkSysConf. This way, if some other main linuxes
(Mandrake, Suse, debian, redhat fedora, ...) qualify according to this
check then full support will be given too.

 

What I'm saying here is my own view, and not Cadence's (this is true of
all my posts here).

The trouble with even having checkSysConf support is that somebody needs
to actually test it on all these variants; otherwise the checkSysConf check
is of no use whatsoever if we just have a wild stab in the dark guess as
to whether it is supported...

It's a nice idea, but it's very hard to give partial support to an OS.

There have been ideas touted to give support for a Linux Base release
(I forget the correct name for this) that various distro's sign up against,
but even that is pretty hard.

Mind you, I find it amazing that people are prepared to spend tens or hundreds
of thousands of dollars on EDA software, but aren't prepared to spend $200 on
the OS... (controversial view, maybe...)

Regards,

Andrew.

 

United Linux?

This is a matter of choice. At the Eda tools (unfortunatly) there is
no way of getting around these some hundred thousand $. With the os
there has been a way. We have internal computer staff supporting
linux, and do not need that much help from these distributions... So
we would like not to pay double for internal and external staff.

But you are right. The main expense is the eda-software. And to me it
seems to be unreasonable prices... Comparing quality of software and
prices eda software is to my feeling a very bad deal for the user.
Regards, Harald

 

Well, if I ruled the world, I'd be running all my EDA software
on Solaris x86, and happily paying Sun for the priviledge. But
that horse left the barn years ago, I guess, and it's way too
late for McNealy to change his mind about it now (even if he wanted
to)...

So in the current Linux x86 EDA environment, my current bitch is
that there *isn't* any sensible way to spend $200 (or $100/year,
or whatever) on the OS. If you look at the current on-line Cadence
support matrix:

http://www.cadence.com/support/computing/32bit.aspx

....my only real choice is RH7.2. AFAIK, it is not possible to buy
support for 7.2 from Redhat! Synopsys was not any better, last time
I looked, and I've not checked Mentor (not currently a customer).

Personally, I'd strongly prefer that Cadence support SUSE, but if
Redhat is going to be the one supported option, it really does need
to be RHEL, since apparently nothing else besides Fedora is going to
exist (from a support point-of-view).

-Jay-