so, when is this available?
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Brian J. Murrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 22:06 -0500, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: >> >> I appreciate the effort ;) > > :-) > >> I went through the process of installing on Debian a month or two ago. >> It seems to work relatively well. > > Good to hear. > >> All this effort in packaging and QA problems > > I wondering what QA problems you are referring to. > >> seems to kinda be something >> that would just go away with a patchless server though. > > True enough, some amount of packaging effort would go away with > patchless server support. Patchless server support doesn't really do > anything to make QA any easier though. > > But ultimately, at least currently, a patchless server would have a > significant performance impact. Most of our customers, as much as they > would like a patchless server, appreciate the performance gains that can > be made for the patched kernel (on what should be a dedicated server > anyway). > >> Which I think >> leads back to having good documentation on what each patch in the set is >> for, > > Sure. In an ideal world where there were no resource limitations. > >> and what issues it has in getting merged into upstream kernel.org. > > You can probably dig into lkml for that. Rest assured, we have tried, > more than once in the past from what I understand and were met with and > tried to work through various objections each time. I won't attempt to > even give opinions on why those attempts were blocked as I was not at > all involved in the effort. But we've been there and done that. > > b. > > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
