Brad, cool now we are on the same track :)
So whatever change we made after this location src/* as it mapped to respective rpm correct?
For eg:-
src/osd/* -- ceph-osd
src/common - ceph-common
src/mon - ceph-mon
src/mgr - ceph-mgr
Since we are using bluestore with kraken, I though to disable the below warning while triggering `ceph -s`
~~~
WARNING: the following dangerous and experimental features are enabled:
WARNING: the following dangerous and experimental features are enabled:
~~~
Here I made a comment in this file
>vim src/common/ceph_context.cc
307 // if (!cct->_experimental_features.empty())
308 // lderr(cct) << "WARNING: the following dangerous and experimental features are enabled: "
309 // << cct->_experimental_features << dendl;
As per my assumption, the change should reflect in this binary "ceph-common"
But when I closely looked on librados library as these warning showing here also.
#strings -a /usr/lib64/librados.so.2 | grep dangerous
WARNING: the following dangerous and experimental features are enabled: -->
Then I conclude for this change ceph-common and librados were required.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Brad Hubbard <bhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Oh wow, I completely misunderstood your question.
Yes, src/osd/PG.cc and src/osd/PG.h are compiled into the ceph-osd binary which
is included in the ceph-osd rpm as you said in your OP.
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:10 AM, nokia ceph <nokiacephusers@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Piotr,
>
> I didn't understand, could you please elaborate about this procedure as
> mentioned in the last update. It would be really helpful if you share any
> useful link/doc to understand what you actually meant. Yea correct, normally
> we do this procedure but it takes more time. But here my intention is to how
> to find out the rpm which caused the change. I think we are in opposite
> direction.
>
>>> But wouldn't be faster and/or more convenient if you would just recompile
>>> binaries in-place (or use network symlinks)
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Piotr Dałek <piotr.dalek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/23/2017 02:02 PM, nokia ceph wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Piotr,
>>>
>>> We do customizing ceph code for our testing purpose. It's a part of our
>>> R&D :)
>>>
>>> Recompiling source code will create 38 rpm's out of these I need to find
>>> which one is the correct rpm which I made change in the source code.
>>> That's
>>> what I'm try to figure out.
>>
>>
>> Yes, I understand that. But wouldn't be faster and/or more convenient if
>> you would just recompile binaries in-place (or use network symlinks) instead
>> of packaging entire Ceph and (re)installing its packages each time you do
>> the change? Generating RPMs takes a while.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Piotr Dałek
>> piotr.dalek@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://www.ovh.com/us/
>
>
>
--> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph. com
>
Cheers,
Brad
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
