On Sat, 10 May 2014 21:02:53 Ben Hutchings wrote: > Please don't do this.
I had to do it for troubleshooting as well as for delivering bugfix and new
features support. I agree is should be temporary thing but I see no harm in
it. I think I'm not the only one who might need it. For example there is
upstream bug report to package modules for RHEL separately:
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/6986
In any case I'm planning to target it for "experimental" only.
I know it is not suitable for release without upstream support.
Why do you think we'd be better without ceph-dkms?
Would it be OK for you if I keep it in experimental (or in unstable with RC
bug "not suitable for release" to prevent migration to "testing")?
> If there are specific ceph features and bug fixes
> that should be backported, talk to the the kernel team.
Thank you. It might be a good idea to let you know about problems.
For instance I've been hit hard by the following bug (I/O errors on RBD
device) that was just fixed by upstream (so I'll have to use my DKMS package
until fix propagate to 3.14):
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/8226
Patch is included to the above bug report.
Trust me, I'm not doing it from boredom and it will be pity to let the effort
die in vain...
--
All the best,
Dmitry Smirnov.
---
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he
generally believes to be true.
-- Demosthenes, Third Olynthiac, sct. 19 (349 BCE)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
