On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 07:40:14 -0400 Kaleb KEITHLEY <kkeithle@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 1.0.1e is in Fedora 18+, but Fedora policy is to not offer packages > in EPEL that are also (already) in RHEL. > > We could build the 1.0.1e src.rpm from Fedora on build.gluster.org. I > have some small amount of confidence that it would be compatible with > the 1.0.0 that's on there. > > Thinking about the future though, it would certainly be a problem to > require 1.0.1 for Gluster on CentOS and RHEL. Yup, e.g. there is no chances it will be in RHEL < = 6.4 > We would probably need > to disable encryption on platforms that don't have the required > version of openssl. We should probably survey Ubuntu and Debian to > see which of those have the right version. We're okay for RHEL 7. > > Are we really using a feature that's only available in 1.0.1? I > presume the answer is yes; I'm just doing due diligence by asking. Yes, we use 3 such features: XTS, CMAC, GCM algorithms/modes.. > > On 10/14/2013 05:27 PM, Anand Avati wrote: > > Edward, > > It looks like this patch requires a higher version of openssl (I > > recall you have mentioned before that that dependency was on > > version 1.0.1c? I checked yum update on the build server and the > > latest available version is 1.0.0-27. Is there a "clean" way to get > > the right version of openssl to a RHEL/CENTOS-6.x server? > > > > Also note that the previous submission of the patch was at > > http://review.gluster.org/4667. The recent on > > (http://review.gluster.org/6086) has a different Change-Id: in the > > commit log. It will be good if you can re-submit the patch with the > > old Change-Id (and abandon #6086) so that we can maintain the > > history of resubmission and the old work on records. > > > > Thanks! > > Avati [...]
