| 1 |
I studied Lustre last week a little bit and, talking about MDSs and |
| 2 |
OSSs, I came with one reason for them not to make Lustre to support |
| 3 |
Gentoo: Lustre uses a lot of kernel features that if not enabled will |
| 4 |
cause the kernel to crash. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I didn't find any documentation explaning those features but I could |
| 7 |
make a list of the orbivious ones: LVM, DM, ext3, ... |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I think that even they can't make a list of all those features, that |
| 10 |
is why they have to make Lustre available mainly on pre-compiled / |
| 11 |
pre-configured kernels. And, thank God, Gentoo doesn't have a |
| 12 |
predefined kernel. Although that would make easy for them to change |
| 13 |
and distribute it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
What do you think about my ideia? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
But that leads to a more generic question: if Linux is always Linux |
| 18 |
(the kernel), and the distro is only a way to organize packages, files |
| 19 |
and init scripts, why would anyone need restrict an open source |
| 20 |
software to a distro? If my first assumption is right, the quicky (but |
| 21 |
not necessarily well thought) answer would be: lack of knowledge. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Best, |
| 24 |
Daniel Colchete |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
- |
| 27 |
On 12/4/06, Bryan Green <bgreen@××××××××.gov> wrote: |
| 28 |
> I wonder... They are going to be OS agnostic on the client side when 1.6 |
| 29 |
> comes out, because of the "patchless client", i.e. the kernel on the client |
| 30 |
> side does not need to be patched. |
| 31 |
> On the server side, what is missing is a patched gentoo-sources or |
| 32 |
> vanilla-sources kernel. But we know that there is a lustre-kernel ebuild |
| 33 |
> out there. Depending on the issues involved, getting them to support Gentoo |
| 34 |
> may just be a matter of getting them to support the lustre-kernel package. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> -bryan |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-cluster@g.o mailing list |
Archives