On 09/11/2018 15:08, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
On 11/9/18 8:12 AM, lejeczek wrote:
hi guys
I presume because 4.1.x has been in EPEL repo it is confirmed and
validated to work 100% with default samba installation.
GlusterFS — any version — is _not_ in EPEL.
However it is in the CentOS Storage SIG.
all glusterfs I see & get is simply from/by installing packages, eg
centos-release-gluster312-1.0-2.el7.centos.noarch
centos-release-gluster41-1.0-3.el7.centos.noarch
These are simply repo packages but still these repos points to centos'
own mirrors.
To me it seems like all gluster versions are there in Centos, so is Samba.
So I do not tamper with packages, nor I get/use extra third party repos.
Thus my question is valid and correct - anybody would assume that these
should be tested, specifically Samba against glusterfs, especially
against 4.1.x
No?
But, I'd prefer to here you guys say you ACTUALLY have your samba work
100% with 4.1.x. Anybody?
Nobody has built Samba in the CentOS Storage SIG with GlusterFS support.
Not for a long time anyway. The last time it was built was over four
years ago — for el6.
It would be great if someone in one of the Gluster, Samba, or CentOS
communities would start building it on a regular basis.
Any volunteers?
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
