| 1 |
Daniel van Ham Colchete wrote: |
| 2 |
> I studied Lustre last week a little bit and, talking about MDSs and |
| 3 |
> OSSs, I came with one reason for them not to make Lustre to support |
| 4 |
> Gentoo: Lustre uses a lot of kernel features that if not enabled will |
| 5 |
> cause the kernel to crash. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I didn't find any documentation explaning those features but I could |
| 8 |
> make a list of the orbivious ones: LVM, DM, ext3, ... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I think that even they can't make a list of all those features, that |
| 11 |
> is why they have to make Lustre available mainly on pre-compiled / |
| 12 |
> pre-configured kernels. And, thank God, Gentoo doesn't have a |
| 13 |
> predefined kernel. Although that would make easy for them to change |
| 14 |
> and distribute it. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> What do you think about my ideia? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It really shouldn't be that difficult to add in features until it stops |
| 19 |
crashing, then specify those features as dependencies in the kernel |
| 20 |
build system. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> But that leads to a more generic question: if Linux is always Linux |
| 23 |
> (the kernel), and the distro is only a way to organize packages, files |
| 24 |
> and init scripts, why would anyone need restrict an open source |
| 25 |
> software to a distro? If my first assumption is right, the quicky (but |
| 26 |
> not necessarily well thought) answer would be: lack of knowledge. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Sure. If they offer to support Lustre on a distribution, they need to be |
| 29 |
able to fix problems on that distribution. That means being aware of |
| 30 |
possible distribution-specific interactions that could cause issues and |
| 31 |
also knowing how to deal with them as well as reproduce them locally. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Thanks, |
| 34 |
Donnie |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-cluster@g.o mailing list |
Archives