Re: [lustre-discuss] KMOD vs DKMS

[Rick Wagner]

Hi Brian,

I consider build processes somewhat fragile, especially when you expect to get 
the same results across a large number of hosts, like a set of Lustre servers. 
As a result, I favor building a single set of RPMs, testing them, and then 
pushing an update to the production servers. So count me in the kmod camp.

In the case of a small number of NFS servers, I might go with dkms for 
convenience.

—Rick

> On Jul 18, 2017, at 10:22 AM, Brian Andrus  wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> I have been watching some of the discussions/issues folks have with building 
> lustre and I am wondering what the consensus is on the two approaches.
> 
> Myself, I have been building my own RPMs for some time and it seemed to me 
> that the general direction of linux was to move toward kmod and away from 
> dkms, so I redesigned my build scripts to use zfs/kmod and dropped ldiskfs. 
> Certainly, this has made life easier when there are kernel updates :)
> 
> So if there is a choice between the two, what is preferred and why?
> 
> Hopefully this doesn't start a war or anything...
> 
> Brian Andrus
> Firstspot, Inc.
> 
> ___
> lustre-discuss mailing list
> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

[lustre-discuss] KMOD vs DKMS

[Brian Andrus]

All,

I have been watching some of the discussions/issues folks have with 
building lustre and I am wondering what the consensus is on the two 
approaches.


Myself, I have been building my own RPMs for some time and it seemed to 
me that the general direction of linux was to move toward kmod and away 
from dkms, so I redesigned my build scripts to use zfs/kmod and dropped 
ldiskfs. Certainly, this has made life easier when there are kernel 
updates :)


So if there is a choice between the two, what is preferred and why?

Hopefully this doesn't start a war or anything...

Brian Andrus
Firstspot, Inc.

___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre 2.10.0 ZFS version

[Riccardo Veraldi]

you can use the dkms lustre package (build it from rpms) and get rid of
kmod dependencies

On 7/17/17 9:42 AM, Götz Waschk wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> I wasn't able to install the official binary build of
> kmod-lustre-osd-zfs, even with kmod-zfs-0.6.5.9-1.el7_3.centos from
> from zfsonlinux.org, the ksym deps do not match. For me, it is always
> rebuilding the lustre source rpm against the zfs kmod packages.
>
> Regards, Götz Waschk
>
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Jones, Peter A  
> wrote:
>> 0.6.5.9 according to lustre/Changelog. We have tested with pre-release 
>> versions of 0.7 during the release cycle too if that’s what you’re wondering.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/17/17, 1:55 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Götz Waschk" 
>> > goetz.was...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> which version of kmod-zfs was the official Lustre 2.10.0 binary
>>> release for CentOS 7.3 built against?
>>>
>>> Regards, Götz Waschk
>>> ___
>>> lustre-discuss mailing list
>>> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
>>> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
> ___
> lustre-discuss mailing list
> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
>

___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org