[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-users] RHEL6.6 provides Gluster 3.6.0-28.2 ?

[Niels de Vos]

On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 04:39:48PM +0000, Justin Clift wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 21:04:46 +0100
> Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com> wrote:
> <snip> 
> > (1) The main problem is that RHEL/CentOS now provides the glusterfs
> > client packages in a version that is higher than the community
> > GlusterFS packages. RHEL (or rather Red Hat Storage) took a
> > pre-release of glusterfs-3.6 and included that in RHEL-6.6. This
> > means that on updating, yum will find the newer RHEL packages, but
> > there is no matching glusterfs-server. If you have glusterfs-server
> > installed from the gluster.org repository, yum can not update
> > glusterfs-server, and dependency errors are the result.
> 
> <snip>	
> > The first problem is going to be solved by releasing glusterfs-3.6.1
> > in the following days. This makes the community version have a higher
> > version than the packages in RHEL/CentOS, and yum would prefer these
> > and it can resolve all dependencies, including glusterfs-server.
> 
> As an idea, do you reckon using the "Epoch" tag in the .spec files
> (upstream, or RHS downstream) would help to fix the problem?

That is an option, and we briefly considered it. But it is not a very
nice thing to do. We have to update the package for 3.6 anyway, so 3.6.1
is a nice solution.

It would work for 3.4 and 3.5 (epoch/serial needs to be set to the same
value for all community packages, in that case), but there might be
other difficulties while (automatic) downgrading the RHEL/CentOS
glusterfs-3.6.0 packages. My current preference goes to
"exclude=glusterfs*" in yum.conf(.d?) and a "includepkgs=glusterfs*" in
the gluster.repo file. However, I've not tested it with "yum downgrade"
either.

It is relatively easy to push a packaging change only, that would not
demand a 3.6.2 release. I hope to have time to discuss about our
preferred approach for 3.4 and 3.5 later this week.

Thanks,
Niels

> 
> Daniel Veillard (CC'd) suggested it today in my team meeting when
> hearing of the problem.  Apparently it's an old packager trick for
> dealing with issues like this. (not a very well liked trick, but
> it's there for a reason, etc.)
> 
> Regards and best wishes,
> 
> Justin Clift
> 
> -- 
> GlusterFS - http://www.gluster.org
> 
> An open source, distributed file system scaling to several
> petabytes, and handling thousands of clients.
> 
> My personal twitter: twitter.com/realjustinclift
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20141104/8a708fb7/attachment.sig>