On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 09:49:12AM -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 12:56 -0400, Mag Gam wrote: > > Robin, > > > > Thankyou very much for helping with this. > > > > I want to try kernel 2.6.25 or even 2.6.26. But its not a big deal, I > > just patched my distro kernel and everything seems to work well. > > I am hoping in the future lustre will become a deamon or a module > > instead of patching the actual kernel source code. This is causing too > > many pains > > Seriously, this whole thing is a lot, lot, less painful if you just run > one of our supported distros on your MDS and OSSes (i.e. you can simply > install RPMs to get up and going). Your MDS and OSS should be "sealed > server" type dedicated machines that do nothing else but serve metadata > and file objects (respectively) so getting a bleeding edge kernel on > them should not be a requirement.
Maybe a lot less painful for Sun support ;) .. But what if you need a new RDMA NIC driver that actually *works* in 2.6.26, and is completely busted in a vendor/distro kernel. Is Debian a supported distro? And if not, why? It seems that making debian policy compliant Lustre server packages would be a good excercise for code and packaging quality. I haven't keep up on linux-kernel lately, but is there some fundamental reason that Lustre *still* requires kernel patches that don't have a path into the mainline kernel tree? _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
