Hi Kasper -
ceph-deploy has a couple open bugs on Fedora that we need to fix before it
works. Currently the only supported rpm platform is Centos/RHEL 6. Those
packages can be found at http://ceph.com/rpm-cuttlefish/el6/noarch/ .The
modules install into the python 2.6.6 site library so
Thanks for letting us know. I'll incorporate Wido's fix.
Cheers,
Gary
On May 8, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Henning Verbeek wrote:
Dear ceph developers,
I just tried to upgrade my ceph installation from bobtail to
cuttlefish on a debian 6.0 squeeze installation. The installation of
package 'ceph'
The version requirements were relaxed a couple releases ago to allow the
installation of newer libraries. Occasionally folks want to run a newer
library to pick up a specific fix before upgrading all of ceph.
We definitely want installation and upgrade to be surprise free. Maybe it is
Hi Kirin -
The Ceph 0.56.3 (Bobtail) release includes Fedora18 rpms. You can find those
at: http://www.ceph.com/rpm-bobtail/fc18/x86_64/
Cheers,
Gary
On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:01 PM, Kiran Patil wrote:
Hello,
Ceph Rpm Packages are up to Fedora 17.
May I know when will Fedora 18 Rpm
Hi Greg -
It's new and not quite finished being set up.
Cheers,
Gary
On Feb 8, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
I'm not sure who's responsible for this, but I see everything is red
on our i386 Quantal gitbuilder. Probably just needs
libboost-program-options installed, based on the
Hi Danny -
These patches are now in the wip.cppchecker branch. Build so far looks good.
Cheers,
Gary
On Feb 5, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
These patches fix some issues found by using cppchecker/clang++.
Danny Al-Gaaf (8):
WorkQueue.h: fix cast
ceph_crypto.cc: remove unused
Hi -
This is a relatively small change but involves changing a perl regex to sed:
diff --git a/src/logrotate.conf b/src/logrotate.conf
index 9af3104..0a4a5a2 100644
--- a/src/logrotate.conf
+++ b/src/logrotate.conf
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
#
The patches have been applied to the wip-rpm-update3 branch. Additionally,
rbd-fuse has been put into it's own package.
Please have a look and let me know if that works for everyone.
Thanks,
Gary
On Jan 30, 2013, at 9:10 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
On 01/30/2013 09:08 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
I'll pick up these patches and create an rbd-fuse package.
Cheers,
Gary
On Jan 30, 2013, at 9:10 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
On 01/30/2013 09:08 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
On 01/30/2013 11:55 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
I think the end goal is to build an rbd-fuse package, just like
ceph-fuse.
I'm not
Hi Danny -
These two patches are now in the wip-rpm-update-2 branch. Will merge into
master after build test.
Thanks,
Gary
On Jan 23, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Since we use already AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, no need to include m4/acx_pthread.m4
extra.
Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf
On Jan 12, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Am 11.01.2013 06:13, schrieb Gary Lowell:
[...]
Thanks Danny. Installing sharutils solved that minor issue. We now
get though the build just fine on opensuse 12, but sles 11sp2 gives
more warnings (pasted below). Should we be using
On Jan 9, 2013, at 11:55 PM, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Am 10.01.2013 05:32, schrieb Gary Lowell:
I have this patch, and the ones from Friday in the wip-rpm-update branch.
Everything looks good except that we have the following new warning from
configure:
….
checking for kaffe
No Problem.
Cheers,
Gary
On Jan 4, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
Thanks!
Gary, can you pull these into a branch and do some before-and-after
package comparisons on our systems (for the different distros in
gitbuilder) and then merge into master?
-Greg
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at
On Dec 13, 2012, at 1:09 AM, James Page wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/12/12 23:38, Gary Lowell wrote:
I took your new rules file out for a spin. It built ok, but we
still got the libcephfs-java_0.55.1-1precise_all.deb built despite
the --binary-arch flag
On Dec 12, 2012, at 2:17 PM, James Page wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/12/12 15:44, Sage Weil wrote:
Gah - this will bite when I do the next upload to Ubuntu as
well then; Can I suggest that we rework debian/rules for
debhelper = 7 and use overrides rather
On Dec 11, 2012, at 2:06 AM, James Page wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/12/12 06:32, Gary Lowell wrote:
I assume you are building with dpkg-buildpackage ?
The manpage shows:
-B Specifies a binary-only build, limited to architecture
dependent
Hi -
I'm looking for advice on debian multiple architecture repositories. To date
we have been building ceph debian packages on two different machines for the
i386 and amd64 platforms, rsyncing the results to a common directory on the
build host, then putting the results together using the
On Dec 10, 2012, at 9:34 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
Hi,
On 12/11/2012 01:19 PM, Gary Lowell wrote:
Hi -
I'm looking for advice on debian multiple architecture repositories. To
date we have been building ceph debian packages on two different machines
for the i386 and amd64
On Dec 10, 2012, at 9:34 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, Gary Lowell wrote:
Hi -
I'm looking for advice on debian multiple architecture repositories.
To date we have been building ceph debian packages on two different
machines for the i386 and amd64 platforms, rsyncing
Hi Dino -
The rpms are out there at: http://www.ceph.com/rpm-testing/el6/x86_64/. What
sort of problem are you having ?
Thanks,
Gary
On Dec 6, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Dino Yancey wrote:
Hi,
The EL6 RPM repository on ceph.com does not appear to have been
updated for 0.55. Any idea when
Hi -
The debian-testing repository for v0.55 has been fixed.
The issue was that we've added a new all arch package, and didn't handle it
being built on both amd64 and i386. The reprepro command got a checksum error
and didn't complete building the index.
Cheers,
Gary--
To unsubscribe from
Hi -
We are setting up an in-house build machine on SLES 11SP2. I've run into a
couple issues compiling the latest ceph release. I suspect the root problem
is that we need more up to date Boost libraries. The latest I can find for
SLES are version 1.36.
So I am wondering how other folks
Just tried a fresh checkout and build and didn't see the issue. There may
have been commits between your issue and my test this morning.
On possible problem might be that your third command reads module instead of
submodule. I assume that's a typo, but if not that would explain
knows
more history will have to answer that.
Cheers,
Gary
On Nov 2, 2012, at 7:21 PM, Noah Watkins wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Gary Lowell gary.low...@inktank.com wrote:
Looks like the complaints come from a small number of newish programs that
are compiled only when
Hi Hemant -
You don't need to build and install from the deb packages. The make install
does put things under /usr/local by default, which is different from the
packages. That can be overridden when running configure. configure --help
will give you the options.
Someone who has done this
Looks like the complaints come from a small number of newish programs that are
compiled only when the --with-debug flag is given. When building against
cryptpp (--with-cryptpp) the pk11 headers are found implicitly and when
building agains libnss (--with-nss) they are not.
So we probably
Hi Noah -
What platform are you building on, and are you building with nss or cryptopp ?
Thanks,
Gary
On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:22 PM, Noah Watkins wrote:
Whoops, here is the original error:
CXXtest_idempotent_sequence.o
In file included from ./os/LFNIndex.h:27:0,
from
1, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Gary Lowell gary.low...@inktank.com wrote:
Hi Noah -
What platform are you building on, and are you building with nss or
cryptopp ?
Thanks,
Gary
On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:22 PM, Noah Watkins wrote:
Whoops, here is the original error:
CXX
Hi Sage -
Sam may have the build machines updated. I'll double check that, and take care
of any packaging changes.
Cheers,
Gary
On Oct 31, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
apt-get install libboost-program-options-dev
on debian-based distros; not sure what the rpm equivalent is yet.
I didn't have that on my todo list, but I'll add it.
Cheers,
Gary
On Oct 31, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
Gary, were you also going to update README? (I know, it's imperfect, but...)
On 10/31/2012 10:25 AM, Gary Lowell wrote:
Hi Sage -
Sam may have the build machines updated
Looks like Sam fixed that this morning.
Cheers,
Gary
On Oct 31, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Dan Mick wrote:
Gary, were you also going to update README? (I know, it's imperfect, but...)
On 10/31/2012 10:25 AM, Gary Lowell wrote:
Hi Sage -
Sam may have the build machines updated. I'll double
Hi Hemant -
I'll be happy to help you with the problem. The first things that would be
helpful for me to know is what version of ceph you are trying to build, what
distribution you are building on, and what your yum repositories are. You can
get the last piece of information with the yum
The ceph 0.52 rpm packages have been rebuilt without the libcryptopp dependency.
Let me know if there are any further issues, or suggestions for improvements.
Cheers,
Gary
On Sep 27, 2012, at 2:08 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2012, Marino Pascual wrote:
Add the EPEL repo and you can
33 matches
Mail list logo
