On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 05:59:43PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Sorry, I hit the wrong button (send instead of save) so here we go again: > > Hi, > > I took over the ITP (237713) for Lustre from Andres Salomon and > recently Alastair McKinstry also showed interest in this. Both of use > use Lustre at work so there will be some paid time spend on keeping > this current.
Cool! > Now to my question. Lustre needs a specialy patched kernel and builds > a ton (~100MB uncompressed) of kernel modules and support > binaries. How should that be handled? > > Would it be OK for lustre to build its own out-of-tree kernel image > and modules? Or would that be too much extra work for the security > team to support? I'm ok with maintaining it from a security perspective if it tracks the latest linux-source package and someone on your side is willing to help with Lustre-specific issues (patch conflicts with security fixes, lustre-specific security issues) throughout the lifetime of any stable release it enters. How big is the patchset these days, and what does it touch? I haven't messed with Lustre since 2.4.20 where the core patches were mostly adding intents, etc - stuff that I thought had been merged upstream in 2.6. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
