[Openstack-devel] sync Ceph packaging efforts for Debian/Ubuntu
sage at inktank.com
Sat Jun 16 21:50:26 UTC 2012
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
- 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,
- 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...
- That same patch also switched all the Architecture: lines back to
linux-any. Was that intentional? I just changed them from that last
- I did apply the python-ceph Depends: portion of that patch.
The result so far is in the 'debian' branch of ceph.git. Please take a
16 Jun 2012, Laszlo Boszormenyi (GCS) wrote:
> Hi all parties,
> Ceph is packaged at three places: in Ubuntu, at upstream and in Debian.
> Its first 'stable' release, 0.48 is coming. At least as Sage wrote some
> days ago: "It looks like 0.48 will also be the basis for one of our
> first 'stable' releases.".
> Hereby I would like to sync our Debian related packaging efforts, not
> only for the mentioned stable release. The OpenStack packaging team
> would like to add Ceph to their stack. Howtos, helping hands on forums
> needs it as well.
> I'm not subscribed to the lists, please keep me in the loop with Cc-s.
> First patch, 0002-Add-support-PPC.patch is for upstream. Would help the
> in tree leveldb to build on PowerPC architectures as well.
> Second patch reflect the homepage and git tree changes for Ubuntu.
> Third patch is from them, noted as "Switch from libcryptopp to libnss as
> libcryptopp is not seeded.". So libnss3-dev is used as build-dependency
> instead. Sage, would you commit it?
> I've separated gceph out, if someone needs the CLI only, then s/he can
> do that without the GTK+ libraries. See below.
> 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.
> As I see, you still ship d/librgw1.install , d/librgw1.postrm ,
> d/librgw1.postinst and librgw-dev.install . They are not needed anymore.
> Maybe the biggest change is that ceph-mds was separated out and such,
> ceph-fs-common created for cephfs and mount.ceph .
> Please move the configure call to its target, as you can check in git.
> Add var/lib/ceph/mon , var/lib/ceph/osd and var/lib/ceph/mds to
> d/ceph.dirs .
> git patch is for Sage, upstream and contains what needed for the new
> packages. May I get commit rights to debian/ or should I go with git
> forks and you'll merge the changes?
> Also it seems that limit the architectures to build on is not
> allowed. I'll write an email to this issue, how to go with failing
> leveldb build-dependency on some archs.
> Loic, do you need anything or do you have any objections with these
>  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677626
More information about the Openstack-devel