Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply "yum update ovirt-*"?
On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: >> Mike Burns wrote: >>> On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: >>>> H. Haven Liu wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 >>>>> (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful >>>>> when doing such update? >>>> Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the >>>> release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain >>>> not (yet) working on el6. >>>> Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you >>>> can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with >>>> 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. >>> >>> We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support >>> for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding >>> a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, >>> but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists >> You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved >> speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left >> out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince >> a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. > > I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so > that it will work for people on EL6. > > From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or > not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from > using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather > release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster > domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. > >> >>> >>>> The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt >>>> team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available >>>> from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 >>>> qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo >>>> which are also in the main distributions repos. >>> >>> We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going >>> forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the >>> other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. >> Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the >> solution comes out. > > There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding > pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my > mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're > looking at whether we can have a "virt-preview" type of repo for EL6 similar > to what exists today for Fedora[1]. > > > Thanks > > Mike > > [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository >> >> Joop >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
