Hi,
much like debian already has, I would suggest to not make systemd a
dependency for Ceph (or anything for that matter). The reason being here
that we desperately need sysvinit until the systemd forks are ready
which offer the systemd init system without all those slapped-on
appendages that systemd has accumulated.
Alternatively, would it possible to maintain a dedicated changelog where
all changes to the init scripts are being collected so that people can
maintain their own sysvinit scripts? I just can't foresee systemd
becoming usable in the near future and thus we will have to rely on
sysvinit for quite a while longer.
RHEL6 will be maintained until Nov 2020, debian wheezy LTS until May
2018, so I feel like it would be premature to drop those already. I
can't give any names but I know of at least 2 customers I am consulting
for that have blocked the RHEL7 upgrade due to systemd.
Regards,
Marc
On 07/30/2015 03:54 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
As time marches on it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain proper
builds and packages for older distros. For example, as we make the
systemd transition, maintaining the kludgey sysvinit and udev support for
centos6/rhel6 is a pain in the butt and eats up time and energy to
maintain and test that we could be spending doing more useful work.
"Dropping" them would mean:
- Ongoing development on master (and future versions like infernalis and
jewel) would not be tested on these distros.
- We would stop building upstream release packages on ceph.com for new
releases.
- We would probably continue building hammer and firefly packages for
future bugfix point releases.
- The downstream distros would probably continue to package them, but the
burden would be on them. For example, if Ubuntu wanted to ship Jewel on
precise 12.04, they could, but they'd probably need to futz with the
packaging and/or build environment to make it work.
So... given that, I'd like to gauge user interest in these old distros.
Specifically,
CentOS6 / RHEL6
Ubuntu precise 12.04
Debian wheezy
Would anyone miss them?
In particular, dropping these three would mean we could drop sysvinit
entirely and focus on systemd (and continue maintaining the existing
upstart files for just a bit longer). That would be a relief. (The
sysvinit files wouldn't go away in the source tree, but we wouldn't worry
about packaging and testing them properly.)
Thanks!
sage
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
