Hey,
I read some basic information from homepage and Wikipedia.
Looks like 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 versions have been released in last years.
Shouldn't Debian package been updated to 2.x as well?
If staying on 1.8, 1.8.6 and later clients can interoperate 2.x servers.
But Debian package is still at
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:26:17PM +0200, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
this is not that bad than it sounds as lustre is a very very specific
kind of software, which is rarely/not at all used by normal users.
Hi,
I don't think this is RC from a FTBFS point of view, but I'm not
entirely sure about
severity 651795 wishlist
thanks
Hey,
as shown on the support matrix from whamcloud (or of lustre.org) linux
3.1 is not supported by upstream, thus the compilation of lustre-source
against the kernel source 3.1 is really allowed to fail here.
The correct title for this bug report should be:
severity 651795 grave
thanks
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 01:25:16PM +0200, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
severity 651795 wishlist
thanks
Hey,
as shown on the support matrix from whamcloud (or of lustre.org) linux
3.1 is not supported by upstream, thus the compilation of lustre-source
against the
Hey,
Upstream support is irrelavant for this bug.
Nope it is not..
in fact this situation was exactly the same for the last two debian
releases... lustre didn't support the standard kernel in these
releases.
this is not that bad than it sounds as lustre is a very very specific
kind of
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:26:17PM +0200, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
Hey,
Upstream support is irrelavant for this bug.
Nope it is not..
in fact this situation was exactly the same for the last two debian
releases... lustre didn't support the standard kernel in these
releases.
this is not
On 10.07.2012 15:26, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
I would really appreciate if we could come to the agreement, as done
for
the last releases also, that the support of the standard debian
kernel
is no RC bug for lustre.
Who was it previously agreed with?
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
7 matches
Mail list logo
