| 1 |
Bryan Green wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yes, I actually used those ebuilds to test Lustre on our "mini" 3x3 |
| 3 |
> hyperwall which runs Gentoo. I was able to get it working, but over here |
| 4 |
> they want the supported, released version, whereas those ebuilds are for the |
| 5 |
> beta. I tried to install the released version, but eventually ran into |
| 6 |
> problems. Also, since getting support from CFS is a requirement, that |
| 7 |
> restricts the OS choice to specific versions of Suse or Redhat. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I guess that means we should get in touch with them to get on the |
| 10 |
supported systems list. =) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> I'd very interested in the different approaches here. I had thought about a |
| 13 |
> static portage tree, but that left the problem of getting needed updates, |
| 14 |
> especially GLSA's. Your suggested approach sounds very interesting. |
| 15 |
> How big of an extra administrative burden does that create? Maintaining our |
| 16 |
> own version controlled portage tree might be a hard sell. Thanks for the |
| 17 |
> script - I'll take a look at it. Is there any documentation out there about |
| 18 |
> a static portage tree? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The OSL (Open Source Lab), which hosts much of the Gentoo infrastructure |
| 21 |
and runs a lot of other projects on Gentoo boxes, takes a similar |
| 22 |
approach to what I mentioned above. I think you already know Corey |
| 23 |
Shields, so you could ask him about it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
You may also want to take a look at |
| 26 |
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/43984 -- it's from one |
| 27 |
of our developers who's deployed fairly decent-sized clusters. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Thanks, |
| 30 |
Donnie |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-cluster@g.o mailing list |
Archives