There is already a configure --with-ldiskfsprogs feature in lustre that changes the paths used by mkfs.lustre.
I opened a couple of bugs: 22983: add configure --with-ldiskfsprogs to e2fsprogs 22984: change all references to tune.ldiskfs in lustre to tunefs.ldiskfs There are no patches in the bugs yet... hopefully by early next week. Jim On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 03:27:03PM -0700, Bernd Schubert wrote: > Hello Jim, > > do you mind to post the bug number then? I think it would make sense to > update mkfs.lustre to search for these tools as well > I guess adding a patch in the very same bugzilla would be good. > > Thanks, > Bernd > > On Thursday 03 June 2010, Jim Garlick wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > > > I wholeheartedly agree. I'll submit a patch to bugzilla for your > > consideration. If it's accepted, then we won't have to maintain it :-) > > > > Jim > > > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 01:02:17PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > On 2010-06-03, at 13:47, Jim Garlick wrote: > > > > Actually I just redid the patch for 1.41.10.sun2 (attached). > > > > Haven't tested it yet but it should be OK. > > > > > > > > It's mostly print stuff with one exception: mke2fs creates a journal if > > > > argv[0] is mke3fs (we add mkfs.ldiskfs). Some of the prints instruct > > > > users to run commands, so its a bit more than cosmetic. > > > > > > If I had one complaint about this patch is the name "tune.ldiskfs" isn't > > > right. The generic command is called "tunefs", so it should be called > > > "tunefs.ldiskfs", like "tunefs.lustre". > > > > > > TUNEFS(8) BSD System Manager's Manual > > > TUNEFS(8) > > > > > > NAME > > > tunefs -- tune up an existing file system > > > > > > > > > BUGS > > > You can tune a file system, but you can't tune a fish. > > > > > > HISTORY > > > The tunefs command appeared in 4.2BSD. > > > > > > > > > Now, if I had two complaints about this patch (sorry), the second one > > > would be that it is not possible to include this into our e2fsprogs as-is > > > because it unconditionally replaces all of the command names instead of > > > having a "subst" or #define that allows the use of either the standard > > > command names or the ldiskfsprogs names via a configure option. > > > > > > The 1.6 and 1.8 Lustre allow the use of the --with-ldiskfsprogs configure > > > option in ldiskfs/build/autoconf/lustre-build.m4 to select the alternate > > > names added by your patch, it would be nice to add the same > > > --with-ldiskfsprogs to e2fsprogs so that we can consolidate the e2fsprogs > > > code better. > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 11:55:52AM -0700, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote: > > > >> Hi Jim, > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for the patch. Now I can see how enable using ldiskfsprogs > > > >> instead of e2fsprogs, so than can be installed without overwriting the > > > >> original binaries in e2fsprogs. > > > >> The only thing is that your patch as it is for 1.41.5.sun1, must be > > > >> redone for 1.41.10.sun2, but I wonder if this changes only affect to > > > >> print stuff so that it is 'safe' to not to commit then. Or else, they > > > >> can modify program behaviour > > > >> > > > >> Cheers > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 10:54 -0700, Jim Garlick wrote: > > > >>> I've attached our patch to e2fsprogs which turns it into > > > >>> ldiskfsprogs. We also have a custom spec file for it but since you're > > > >>> using Ubuntu I assume that's of no use to you. > > > >>> > > > >>> This is against 1.41.5.sun1 > > > >>> > > > >>> Jim > > > >>> > > > >>> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 10:19:05AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > >>>> On 2010-06-01, at 07:25, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote: > > > >>>>> On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 02:15 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > > >>>>>> On 2010-06-01, at 01:23, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote: > > > >>>>>>> I've just compiled the last patched e2fsprogs (1.41.10) package > > > >>>>>>> suitable for the last lustre version (1.8.3) and I had some > > > >>>>>>> booting problems when overriding some existing files in original > > > >>>>>>> packages (Ubuntu LTS 10.04), so I thought it would be better to > > > >>>>>>> install only the needed programs from patched e2fsprogs: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> It is possible to build the lustre e2fsprogs as "ldiskfsprogs" via > > > >>>>>> configure option. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Fine. But, I can not see how to do it. No references to > > > >>>>> ldiskfsprogs when doing ./configure --help. Only seen at > > > >>>>> 'e2fsprogs.spec.in, but I do not know how to use. Please, could you > > > >>>>> give me a minimal guideline. I've worked enough with > > > >>>>> autoconf/automake so that I can understand it . > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Hmm, possibly this is still in a patch at LLNL? Maybe Jim (CC'd) > > > >>>> can send you their latest patch. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Also, depending on what the problem actually is, you can build the > > > >>>> e2fsprogs package without many of the optional components: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> --disable-libuuid do not build private uuid library > > > >>>> --disable-libblkid do not build private blkid library > > > >>>> --disable-debugfs disable support of debugfs program > > > >>>> --disable-e2scan disable support of e2scan program > > > >>>> --disable-imager disable support of e2image program > > > >>>> --disable-resizer disable support of e2resize program > > > >>>> --disable-tls disable use of thread local support > > > >>>> --disable-uuidd disable building the uuid daemon > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Of course, it would also be good to figure out what was actually > > > >>>> causing your booting problems, and fix that rather than just working > > > >>>> around it. > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Clients: > > > >>>>> -------- > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Only 'lfsck' (compiled with --with-lustre=_LUSTRE_SOURCE_DIR_) is > > > >>>>> useful > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Servers: > > > >>>>> -------- > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> mke2fs -> called by 'mkfs.lustre' > > > >>>>> e2fsck -> not called by lustre but needed to check a failed MDT/OST > > > >>>>> so it can be installed as other name > > > >>>>> tune2fs -> called by tunefs.lustre?/can be installed as a not > > > >>>>> existing program > > > >>>>> dumpe2fs -> useful but not essential? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Please, tell me if I am missing/misunderstanding something? > > > > > > Cheers, Andreas > > > -- > > > Andreas Dilger > > > Lustre Technical Lead > > > Oracle Corporation Canada Inc. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Lustre-discuss mailing list > > Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > > http://*lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > > > > -- > Bernd Schubert > DataDirect Networks _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss