ompat-foo from the get go, but leads to more bitrot and complexity, imo.
Not sure what the standard approach for openSUSE is anymore, but I'm sure
Markus knows. :)
In other words, from Red Hat's standpoint, the version should be removed from
the libganglia package name. If for some r
Tom Callaway is Fedora's first line of defense when it comes to licensing
questions, and either he knows the answer from looking into tons of package
licensing issues already, or knows who to talk to.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 08 July 2008 07:14:25 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 09:10:37AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Monday 07 July 2008 04:46:05 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 09:27:02AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>
On Monday 07 July 2008 04:46:05 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 09:27:02AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Wednesday 02 July 2008 07:36:41 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> > > The following proposed patch for stable 3.1, replaces the confi
4 neglect
to pass in --libdir=/usr/lib64 and can wind up with less-than-obvious failure
modes. I don't particularly care one way or the other myself, so long as I
can pass in the correct libdir via configure, which is always done f
iding the
> libdir parameter passed at configure time (breaking fedora linux ppc64).
>
> Contains changes from r1452, r1467, r1468, r1475 and r1487
At a glance, yeah, this looks like it should indeed finally Do The Right
Thing(tm) on all Linux architectures for both 32-bit and 64-bit.
On Friday 27 June 2008 08:05:22 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 09:24:13AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > As you can see, we also build ppc32 userspace by default, ppc64 only when
> > explicitly requested.
>
> so you are using CFLAGS=-m64 to for
%configure
> > macro.
>
> if all your %configure invocations use --libdir then we should be clean for
> all the builds already.
Yep, --libdir is always passed in by %configure, and things all built fine for
all arches in our build system right now. Initially, powerpc64 builds fai
On Tuesday 24 June 2008 01:38:29 pm Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 09:42:59AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 24 June 2008 06:45:14 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> > > attached an implementation which fixes the 2 issues raised bef
ot for
a ppc32 binary, which is actually what most people should be using on a ppc64
system. That being the case, if we automatically swap in lib64 on ppc64, it
should probably be done only if host_cpu=powerpc64 *and* the binary being
built is 64-bit.
Hopefully, I'm maki
Bernard Li wrote:
> Hi Jarod:
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Almost. If you do a simple './configure', you wind up with libdir=/usr/lib on
>> x86_64 and ppc64. That's actually fairly common though, an
ease check
> 'gmond/modules/conf.d/multicpu.conf' in your build directory to see if
> it is using the correct libdir (i.e. /usr/lib64) for 'path'?
On my end, ./configure w/o flags on an x86_64 box resulted in a Makefile
with 'libdir=/usr/lib' and multicpu.conf with
On Wednesday 18 June 2008 11:50:30 am Brad Nicholes wrote:
> >>> On 6/17/2008 at 5:05 PM, in message
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Jarod
On Tuesday 17 June 2008 03:22:52 pm Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2008 03:01:07 pm Brad Nicholes wrote:
> > >>> On 6/17/2008 at 12:39 PM, in message
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard
> > Li"
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED
ter. I just think it is important that we get 3.1
> officially released.
I'd agree that this one isn't a huge deal. Things end up where they're
supposed to, its just not done quite correctly yet. Haven't dug into what
needs fixing, but basically, if a libdir value is pass
On Friday 13 June 2008 10:57:48 am Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 June 2008 04:15:07 pm Bernard Li wrote:
> > Hi Jarod:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...and it fell apart on the ppc64 build. Well,
On Wednesday 11 June 2008 04:15:07 pm Bernard Li wrote:
> Hi Jarod:
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...and it fell apart on the ppc64 build. Well, not on the build, per se,
> > but on the packaging. Part of the configur
On Friday 13 June 2008 04:54:48 am Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 01:15:07PM -0700, Bernard Li wrote:
> > Hi Jarod:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...and it fell apart on the
On Wednesday 11 June 2008 03:47:40 pm Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 June 2008 02:01:48 pm Bernard Li wrote:
> > Hi all:
> >
> > The latest 3.1.x snapshot release is now available:
> >
> > http://www.ganglia.info/snapshots/3.1.x
> >
> > Changes
issues on
> different systems/architectures.
To aid in the fun, I've committed r1399 to Fedora's development tree, and have
a build going right now, across i386, x86_64, ppc and ppc64...
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
> necessary RPMs online here:
>
> http://therealms.org/oss/ganglia/rrdtool/
Nb: Fedora 8, Fedora 9 and rawhide (Fedora development tree) all have rrdtool
1.3rc7 builds available as well in their respective yum repos (either in
updates or updates-te
Source's main office in San Francisco to discuss plans
> for the next major 3.1.0 release. If you are interested in
> participating, please join us at #ganglia on irc.freenode.net.
New Fedora builds working through the build system right now, will p
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:11:15 am Jesse Becker wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008 10:08 AM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:04:00 am Jesse Becker wrote:
> > > On Feb 5, 2008 9:57 AM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> &g
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 10:04:00 am Jesse Becker wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008 9:57 AM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/rrdtool/1.3/0.6.beta3.fc9/
> >
> > (despite the fc9 tag, it'll run just fine on Fedora 8 too)
tool/1.3/0.6.beta3.fc9/
(despite the fc9 tag, it'll run just fine on Fedora 8 too)
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Micr
On Monday 04 February 2008 05:08:24 pm Bernard Li wrote:
> Hi Jarod:
>
> On 2/4/08, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I upgraded rawhide to track 1.3 long before the f8
> > release, thinking 1.3 would stabilize and be out before f8, then didn
On Monday 04 February 2008 04:02:03 pm Bernard Li wrote:
> Hi Jarod:
>
> On 2/4/08, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd probably blame rrdtool. I got another memory leak bug report against
> > it just recently that didn't involve ganglia
just recently that didn't involve ganglia.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=430879
Looking into it and engaging upstream rrdtool is on my todo list, but keeps
getting filtered to the bottom of the pile...
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
uld be more like this:
For a 3.1.0 pre-release snapshot:
Version: 3.1.0, Release: 0.1.200710101608
For a 3.1.0 rc:
Version: 3.1.0, Release: 0.2.rc1
For the 3.1.0 release:
Version: 3.1.0, Release: 1
3.1.0-1 > 3.1.0-0.2.rc1 > 3.1.0-0.1.200710101608
(I've long b
coming shortly...
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp1vtOGfoCA4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
physical id : 1
siblings: 4
core id : 1
cpu cores : 2
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpnbKNbfBGo8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
operties. Dunno what was used for the
initial move from cvs to svn, but I think it was the cvs2svn script I
saw do that.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 16:40 +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> On 2006-08-17 10:20:16 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 16:11 +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> > > On 2006-08-17 09:55:38 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 15:4
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 16:11 +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> On 2006-08-17 09:55:38 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 15:46 +0200, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > while we are looking into dependencies:
> > > APR 1.x
"apr" (no libversion
attached), but yeah, the same can still be done w/an apr and a
compat-apr.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
sy enough to remedy.
> I am just wondering whether splitting of apr/expat/libconfuse is
> really a good thing.
I still think it is, more or less echoing the arguments others have
already put forward. :)
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 21:50 +0100, Stu Teasdale wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 04:18:46PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > > Stu, how about for Debian...?
> >
> > From what I can see, its available in Debian repos.
> They're 2.5.x packages unfortunately. I have 3.0
rs old).
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jarod Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wed 16/08/2006 10:56
> To: Bernard Li
> Cc: ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: RE: [Ganglia-developers] apr, expat, confuse asshipped with
> ganglia
>
> O
r it to get into
> RHEL5...?
Highly unlikely at this point in the game, barring it being requested by
a (probably major) customer...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of
> Jarod Wilson
> Sent: Wed 16/08/2006 09:28
> To: ganglia-developers@lists.so
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 10:16 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> I can see about packaging the latest libconfuse for Fedora. However,
> without a special exception, it won't be built for FC4, as FC4 has
> entered 'maintenance mode' (meaning generally nothing new gets built,
&
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 08:34 -0700, Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> --- Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Seems we are safe for "expat", need to check "apr" and are kind of
> > > lost for "libconfuse".
> >
> > I can see a
generally nothing new gets built,
only fixes for existing packages allowed).
[...time passes...]
Almost there with a package that I think will pass Fedora Extras
muster...
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
looked at it yet, currently buried in xen, kexec
and ext4 fun... I just know using distro-provided libs is definitely
preferred in Red Hat land. :)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of
> Jarod Wilson
> Sent: Mon 14/08/2006 10:42
> To: ganglia-developers@
Just to confirm, that works nicely for Red Hat and Fedora too.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
. Perhaps you're missing some needed
rrdtool bits.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
of either spec. :\
For reference, my spec can be seen here:
http://wilsonet.com/packages/ganglia/ganglia.spec
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
46 matches
Mail list logo
