On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 08:50 +0100, Bjorn Torkelsson wrote:> When trying to build lustre against anything newer than 2.6.5 I ran into > #5324. Can we expect a new 1.4.X soon, that builds on anything > else/newer than the "officially" supported SUSE kernel?I''ve successfully built lustre 1.4.X on kernels 2.6.7, 2.6.8, and 2.6.9. For all of this i did have to do some modification of the standard patches, and having one set really helped on the next kernel version. It does take some time for each update, but mostly a few hours of work, and lots of compile time. I would like to see more of these patches in the mainline kernel tree. What would be nice is if we could get an up-to-date bitkeeper tree that tracked the latest released kernel so that we could show working versions of that tree to the kernel crowd. It would be very nice to be able to just checkout the latest tree with lustre already in it. I would be willing to help support a lustre bitkeeper tree and test it heavily. I''m no bitkeeper expert, but i can learn new things once in a while. Evan
I have placed my patch sets for 2.6.8 and 2.6.9 in the lustre Wiki at: https://wiki.clusterfs.com/lustre/LustreStatusonLinux26 Note: these are unsupported by CFS, and i''ve only used them in my environment so there may be issues. Evan On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 10:00 -0800, Evan Felix wrote:> On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 08:50 +0100, Bjorn Torkelsson wrote: > > When trying to build lustre against anything newer than 2.6.5 I ran into > > #5324. Can we expect a new 1.4.X soon, that builds on anything > > else/newer than the "officially" supported SUSE kernel? > > I''ve successfully built lustre 1.4.X on kernels 2.6.7, 2.6.8, and > 2.6.9. For all of this i did have to do some modification of the > standard patches, and having one set really helped on the next kernel > version. It does take some time for each update, but mostly a few hours > of work, and lots of compile time. > > I would like to see more of these patches in the mainline kernel tree. > What would be nice is if we could get an up-to-date bitkeeper tree that > tracked the latest released kernel so that we could show working > versions of that tree to the kernel crowd. It would be very nice to be > able to just checkout the latest tree with lustre already in it. > > I would be willing to help support a lustre bitkeeper tree and test it > heavily. I''m no bitkeeper expert, but i can learn new things once in a > while. > > Evan > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss@lists.clusterfs.com > https://lists.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Christopher Alexander Stein wrote:> Hi, From https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/i686/ > > kernel-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.src.rpm > kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.i686.rpm > > What is the difference between the 2 RPMs ?The kernel-source rpm contains the patched kernel and other files needed to build 3rd party drivers (and Lustre as well) that will load and run with the binary kernel. These sources live in /usr/src. The kernel.src.rpm can be used to rebuild the binary rpms. It contains the Lustre and Linux sources, a .spec file, as well as other scripts and files needed to rebuild all of the rpms. Almost nobody would need to use this rpm. - jacob
On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 18:59 -0500, jacob berkman wrote:> Christopher Alexander Stein wrote: > > Hi, From https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/i686/ > > > > kernel-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.src.rpm > > kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.i686.rpm > > > > What is the difference between the 2 RPMs ?Speeking of that, what is the difference between: https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/x86_64/kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.x86_64.rpm and https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/x86_64/kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_91_ib_lustre.1.4.0.7.x86_64.rpm Do you announce new kernel packages anywhere (especially if they contain security updates)? Are we supposed to check the Download archive daily to see if there are updated packages? In that case how do we know what has happen in the updated packages? I didn''t find any kind of changelog in that package. Do we have to track it upstream? When trying to build lustre against anything newer than 2.6.5 I ran into #5324. Can we expect a new 1.4.X soon, that builds on anything else/newer than the "officially" supported SUSE kernel? /torkel - wondering how long it will take before anyone answers #5566
On 2/4/2005 2:50, Bjorn Torkelsson wrote:> Speeking of that, what is the difference between: > > https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/x86_64/kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP > 1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.x86_64.rpm > > and > > https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/x86_64/kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP > 1_BRANCH_91_ib_lustre.1.4.0.7.x86_64.rpmThe SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_91 kernel contains fixes for the Linux kernel security errata that were so popular a week or two ago.> Do you announce new kernel packages anywhere (especially if they contain > security updates)?We haven''t to this point, no. We can, if that''s what people would like.> Are we supposed to check the Download archive daily > to see if there are updated packages? In that case how do we know what > has happen in the updated packages? I didn''t find any kind of changelog > in that package. Do we have to track it upstream?If you''re asking about changes made to the non-Lustre parts of the kernel, then yes, you should track it upstream.> When trying to build lustre against anything newer than 2.6.5 I ran into > #5324. Can we expect a new 1.4.X soon, that builds on anything > else/newer than the "officially" supported SUSE kernel?You can expect a new 1.4.x soon, but not one that is supported on kernels other than RHEL3''s or SLES9''s. We''ll support RHEL4 when that is released, but I doubt that''s the answer you were hoping for. And I really am sorry about that. I don''t like patching the kernel any more than you do, I can assure you. If you feel strongly about it, then you should make your feelings known the next time we submit a round of patches to the Linux kernel community (which we''re preparing right now, based on their extensive feedback). Thanks-- -Phil
Hi, From https://downloads.clusterfs.com/v1.4/1.4.0/i686/ kernel-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.src.rpm kernel-source-2.6.5-SLES9_SP1_BRANCH_2004111114454891_lustre.1.4.0.i686.rpm What is the difference between the 2 RPMs ? Thanks, Lex