Another problem we've run into with automating GPFS installs/upgrades is
that the gplbin (kernel module) packages have a post-install script that
will unmount the filesystem *even if the package isn't for the running
kernel*. We needed to write some custom reporting in our configuration
management system to only install gplbin if GPFS was already stopped on the
node.

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 10:35:23PM +0000, Sanchez, Paul wrote:
> This reminds me that there is one more thing which drives the convoluted 
> process I described earlier???
> 
> Automation.  Deployment solutions which use yum to build new hosts are often 
> the place where one notices the problem.  They would need to determine that 
> they should install both the base-version and efix RPMS and in that order.  
> IIRC, there were no RPM dependencies connecting the  efix RPMs to their 
> base-version equivalents, so there was nothing to signal YUM that installing 
> the efix requires that the base-version be installed first.
> 
> (Our particular case is worse than just this though, since we prohibit 
> installing two versions/releases for the same (non-kernel) package name.  But 
> that???s not the case for everyone.)
> 
> -Paul
> 
> From: [email protected] 
> <[email protected]> On Behalf Of IBM Spectrum Scale
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 16:00
> To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] How to install efix with yum ?
> 
> 
> This message was sent by an external party.
> 
> 
> >> I don't see any yum options which match rpm's '--force' option.
> Actually, you do not need to use --force option since efix RPMs have 
> incremental efix number in rpm name.
> 
> Efix package provides update RPMs to be installed on top of corresponding PTF 
> GA version. When you install 5.0.4.1 efix9, if 5.0.4.1 is already installed 
> on your system, "yum update" should work.
> 
> Regards, The Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you feel that your question can benefit other users of Spectrum Scale 
> (GPFS), then please post it to the public IBM developerWroks Forum at 
> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/html/forum?id=11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000479.
> 
> If your query concerns a potential software error in Spectrum Scale (GPFS) 
> and you have an IBM software maintenance contract please contact 
> 1-800-237-5511 in the United States or your local IBM Service Center in other 
> countries.
> 
> The forum is informally monitored as time permits and should not be used for 
> priority messages to the Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team.
> 
> [Inactive hide details for Jonathan Buzzard ---01/15/2020 02:09:33 PM---On 
> 15/01/2020 18:30, Sanchez, Paul wrote: > Yum generall]Jonathan Buzzard 
> ---01/15/2020 02:09:33 PM---On 15/01/2020 18:30, Sanchez, Paul wrote: > Yum 
> generally only wants there to be single version of a
> 
> From: Jonathan Buzzard 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> To: 
> "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Date: 01/15/2020 02:09 PM
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] How to install efix with yum ?
> Sent by: 
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> On 15/01/2020 18:30, Sanchez, Paul wrote:
> > Yum generally only wants there to be single version of any package (it
> > is trying to eliminate conflicting provides/depends so that all of the
> > packaging requirements are satisfied).  So this alien packaging practice
> > of installing an efix version of a package over the top of the base
> > version is not compatible with yum.
> 
> I would at this juncture note that IBM should be appending the efix
> number to the RPM so that for example
> 
>     gpfs.base-5.0.4-1 becomes gpfs.base-5.0.4-1efix9
> 
> which would firstly make the problem go away, and second would allow one
> to know which version of GPFS you happen to have installed on a node
> without doing some sort of voodoo.
> 
> >
> > The real issue for draconian sysadmins like us (whose systems must use
> > and obey yum) is that there are files (*liblum.so) which are provided by
> > the non-efix RPMS, but are not owned by the packages according to the
> > RPM database since they???re purposefully installed outside of RPM???s
> > tracking mechanism.
> >
> 
> It worse than that because if you install the RPM directly yum/dnf then
> start bitching about the RPM database being modified outside of
> themselves and all sorts of useful information gets lost when you purge
> the package installation history to make the error go away.
> 
> > We work around this by repackaging the three affected RPMS to include
> > the orphaned files from the original RPMs (and eliminating the related
> > but problematic checks from the RPMs??? scripts) so that our efix RPMs
> > have been ???un-efix-ified??? and will install as expected when using ???yum
> > upgrade???.  To my knowledge no one???s published a way to do this, so we
> > all just have to figure this out and run rpmrebuild for ourselves.
> >
> 
> IBM should be hanging their heads in shame if the replacement RPM is
> missing files.
> 
> JAB.
> 
> --
> Jonathan A. Buzzard                         Tel: +44141-5483420
> HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt.
> University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
> 
> 
> 



> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss


-- 
-- Skylar Thompson ([email protected])
-- Genome Sciences Department, System Administrator
-- Foege Building S046, (206)-685-7354
-- University of Washington School of Medicine
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Reply via email to