On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, James Page wrote: > Hi Sage/Laszlo > > Laszlo - thanks for sending the original email - I'd like to get > everything as closely in-sync as possible between the three packaging > sources as well. > > On 16/06/12 22:50, Sage Weil wrote: > > I've take a closer look at these patches, and have a few questions. > > > > - The URL change and nss patches I've applied; they are in the ceph.git > > 'debian' branch. > > Great! > > > > > - Has the leveldb patch been sent upstream? Once it is committed to > > the upstream git, we can update ceph to use it; that's nicer than carrying > > the patch. However, I thought you needed to link against the existing > > libleveldb1 package... which means we shouldn't do anything on our > > side, > > right? > > I can't see any evidence that this has been sent upstream; ideally we > would be building against libleveldb1 rather than using the embedded > copy - I'm not familiar with the reason that this has not happened > already (if there is one). This package would also need to be reviewed > for inclusion in main if that was the case. We bundled it for expediency, that's all. I just send the patch off to the leveldb mailing list (in case that hadn't happened yet); we'll see if they apply it. > > - I'm not sure how useful it is to break mount.ceph and cephfs into a > > separate ceph-fs-common package, but we can do it. Same goes for a > > separate package for ceph-mds. That was originally motivated by ubuntu > > not wanting the mds in main, but in the end only the libraries went in, so > > it's a moot point. I'd rather hear from them what their intentions are > > for 12.10 before complicating things... > > ceph-fs-common is in Ubuntu main; so I think the original motivation > still stands IMHO. Okay, split that part. > For the Ubuntu quantal cycle we still have the same primary objective as > we had during 12.04; namely ensuring that Ceph RBD can be used as a > block store for qemu-kvm which ties nicely into the Ubuntu OpenStack > story through Cinder; In addition we will be looking at Ceph RADOS as a > backend for Glance (see [0] for more details). I'm reading this to meant hat you still want the mds separated out; did that too. > The MIR for Ceph occurred quite late in the 12.04 cycle so we had to > trim the scope to actually get it done; We will be looking at libfcgi > and google-perftools this cycle for main inclusion to re-enable the > components that are currently disabled in the Ubuntu packaging. Including those (and libleveldb1) would be ideal. > > - That same patch also switched all the Architecture: lines back to > > linux-any. Was that intentional? I just changed them from that last > > week. > > I think linux-any is correct - the change you have made would exclude > the PPC architecture in Ubuntu and Debian. > > [...] > > >> Ben, James, can you please share in some sentences why ceph-fuse is > >> dropped in Ubuntu? Do you need it Sage? If it's feasible, you may drop > >> that as well. > > There is an outstanding question on the 12.04 MIR as to whether this > package could still be built but not promoted to main - I'll follow up > with the MIR reviewer as to whether that's possible as I don't think it > requires any additional build dependencies. > > [...] > > I hope that explains the Ubuntu position on Ceph and what plans we have > this development cycle. Okay, keep us posted! I pushed a new 'debian' branch with those changes; please take a look and let me know if it loks okay. Thanks- sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
