[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Cluster-devel] STABLE cluster branch?!



On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 12:12:00PM +0200, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH ] wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 11.09.2007, 11:48 -0500 schrieb David Teigland:
> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:04:58AM +0200, Marc - A. Dahlhaus [ Administration | Westermann GmbH ] wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > are there any plans to merge the changes/fixes from the RHEL4
> > > branch into STABLE? A new 1.0# release would be nice after that.
> > 
> > We don't have any plans to do that, but would be willing to review and
> > commit patches to STABLE.  It's porting the STABLE kernel dirs to the
> > recent kernel.org releases that's the biggest chore.
> 
> I found out that the fixes/changes from RHEL4 are also in HEAD after my
> last post. We plan to migrate our 6TB GFS 6.1 volume to that tree. Is
> the GFS 6.1 part in HEAD with the OpenAIS based DLM already "production
> stable"?

Yes, HEAD is about the same as the RHEL5 branch.  HEAD follows the latest
kernel.org kernels, but the RHEL5 branch follows the rhel5 kernel.  So,
pick the HEAD or RHEL5 branch depending on the kind of kernel you'd like.

An alternative to using HEAD is to use the cluster-2.xx.yy tarballs which
are snapshots from HEAD at more stable points in time.  Another difficulty
with using HEAD directly is that it sometimes (like now) requires kernel
patches that haven't made it upstream beyond the gfs2 git tree.

Dave


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]