Fair enough, Kaleb. I shouldn't have let my frustration do the talking. It's not a show-stopper for me - yet. At this stage I have enough freedom with this project to keep tinkering and testing. Meanwhile I plan to follow the SIG team's progress closely.
Thanks everyone for your valuable insight1 Dave On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <[email protected]>wrote: > On 03/28/2014 08:07 AM, Dave Christianson wrote: > >> >> Red Hat seems content to do their own thing. Although the versions of >> libvirt and qemu are older, libgfapi is supposed to have been >> backported. It's a shame that full functionality is not included. It's >> mindboggling seeing that Red Hat owns glusterfs, you would think full >> support for the backend would have been included in their product. If it >> is, as you say, that RH includes this functionality only to RHN >> subscribers and is not made available downstream to CentOS/SL, and >> unless I can find a repository with the latest full versions of qemu & >> libvirt, then CentOS simply will not work. >> >> > I'm not sure that's a fair expectation. > > (As a side note, GlusterFS is a community project -- it's owned by the > community. Red Hat has a product that it owns -- RHS or RHSS -- that is based > on GlusterFS.) > > Core 'vanilla' RHEL is pretty conservative. Just because "... Red Hat owns > GlusterFS..." (sic) doesn't mean we get to randomly update the libvirt that > ships in RHEL. RHEL has its own QA cycle which gates when things like > libvirt can be updated. > > As a result the newer libvirt has to be delivered in a separate channel. > The fact that CentOS -- which is a clone of vanilla RHEL -- doesn't > distribute some or all of the things that are in channels is not Red Hat's > fault. > > If there are no RPMs of the newer libvirt available the fault lies with > the community. The source for the newer libvirt is certainly available, as > it always is -- it needs is someone in the community to package it for > general consumption. Someone has done that for Ubuntu! And as John Mark has > already indicated, that's something that the CentOS Storage SIG is intended > to address. > > And finally, although I can't promise that it will be, it's entirely > possible that the newer libvirt could be in RHEL 6.6, and then CentOS would > have it too. > > -- > > Kaleb >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
