Hi,
there are new drbd83-8.3.9 packages available in the testing repository (4 and 5, i386 and x86_64), if you want to try them out.
There shouldn't be a problem to drop those in as a replacement to older drbd83 packages.
Regards,
Ralph
On 10/26/2010 7:13 AM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
there are new drbd83-8.3.9 packages available in the testing repository (4 and 5, i386 and x86_64), if you want to try them out.
Thanks for updating to a more stable version!
There shouldn't be a problem to drop those in as a replacement to older drbd83 packages.
Everything installed very nicely and I've seen no issues with it. The stalling issue that existed in 8.3.8 has been resolved.
Thanks,
-Shad
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Hi,
there are new drbd83-8.3.9 packages available in the testing repository (4 and 5, i386 and x86_64), if you want to try them out.
There shouldn't be a problem to drop those in as a replacement to older drbd83 packages.
Regards,
Ralph
I'll test an upgrade tomorrow at $work on at least one secondary node and i'll post the results
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Hi,
there are new drbd83-8.3.9 packages available in the testing repository (4 and 5, i386 and x86_64), if you want to try them out.
There shouldn't be a problem to drop those in as a replacement to older drbd83 packages.
Regards,
Ralph
I'll test an upgrade tomorrow at $work on at least one secondary node and i'll post the results
I've done a quick test on a secondary node and reported the result in the #centos-social channel directly to Ralph, but I think that it would be a good idea to "archive" my answer on the list too. The machine on which i tested an update wasn't up2date and so was missing that module-init-tools-3.3-0.pre3.1.60.el5_5.1 rpm (released three weeks ago, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593504) As a consequence, that drbd secondary node didn't come back automagically (known issue, see above) I discussed with Ralph to see if that was a good idea (or a bad one) to put an extra Requires: line in the kmod spec to fetch that fixed module-init-tools rpm prior to the kmod update.
One can argue that sysadmins have to keep their machine up2date (which is right) Another one can argue that if those sysadmins didn't update their machine prior to the drbd83 update, some 'bug reports' will appear on bugs.centos.org to say that the latest drbd update broke their cluster .
Thoughts about this ?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arrotin@arrfab.net wrote: <snip>
One can argue that sysadmins have to keep their machine up2date (which is right) Another one can argue that if those sysadmins didn't update their machine prior to the drbd83 update, some 'bug reports' will appear on bugs.centos.org to say that the latest drbd update broke their cluster .
Thoughts about this ?
--
Fabian Arrotin
I think that fetching and installing the required dependencies is the way to go.
In reality it's not always possible to have up to date systems, especially in an enterprise setting. And that may, very likely, have nothing to do with the admins themselves.
Kind regards, -- Jorgen Maas
Am 02.11.10 15:03, schrieb Jörgen Maas:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arrotin@arrfab.net wrote:
Another one can argue that if those sysadmins didn't update their machine prior to the drbd83 update, some 'bug reports' will appear on bugs.centos.org to say that the latest drbd update broke their cluster .
Thoughts about this ?
I think that fetching and installing the required dependencies is the way to go.
In reality it's not always possible to have up to date systems, especially in an enterprise setting. And that may, very likely, have nothing to do with the admins themselves.
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
Regards,
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Am 02.11.10 15:03, schrieb Jörgen Maas:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Fabian Arrotin fabian.arrotin@arrfab.net wrote:
Another one can argue that if those sysadmins didn't update their machine prior to the drbd83 update, some 'bug reports' will appear on bugs.centos.org to say that the latest drbd update broke their cluster .
Thoughts about this ?
I think that fetching and installing the required dependencies is the way to go.
In reality it's not always possible to have up to date systems, especially in an enterprise setting. And that may, very likely, have nothing to do with the admins themselves.
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Am 02.11.10 20:34, schrieb Ned Slider:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Why doesn't anyone tell me? >:)
Okay, let me take another look at that again.
Ralph
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralph Angenendt ralph.angenendt@gmail.com wrote:
Am 02.11.10 20:34, schrieb Ned Slider:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Why doesn't anyone tell me? >:)
Because there was no need. All the info was in the bugzilla report Fabian referenced. :-P
Akemi
Am 02.11.10 21:58, schrieb Akemi Yagi:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralph Angenendt ralph.angenendt@gmail.com wrote:
Am 02.11.10 20:34, schrieb Ned Slider:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Why doesn't anyone tell me? >:)
Because there was no need. All the info was in the bugzilla report Fabian referenced. :-P
Yeah, but I didn't know that when we talked on IRC =:P
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Am 02.11.10 21:58, schrieb Akemi Yagi:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralph Angenendt ralph.angenendt@gmail.com wrote:
Am 02.11.10 20:34, schrieb Ned Slider:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
I don't like hard "Requires:" like those, but in this case there is a new drbd83-kmod package in testing which has that requirement.
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Why doesn't anyone tell me? >:)
Because there was no need. All the info was in the bugzilla report Fabian referenced. :-P
Yeah, but I didn't know that when we talked on IRC =:P
Ralph
Just to add that I've tested now also the kmod-drbd83-xen-8.3.9-2.el5.centos.i686.rpm and that it works fine too.
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Ralph Angenendt ralph.angenendt@gmail.com wrote:
Am 02.11.10 21:58, schrieb Akemi Yagi:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralph Angenendt ralph.angenendt@gmail.com wrote:
Am 02.11.10 20:34, schrieb Ned Slider:
The solution as pointed out by Martin in the bug report (comment #23) is to use a Conflicts for the buggy package, not a Requires for the newer (fixed) package.
Why doesn't anyone tell me? >:)
Because there was no need. All the info was in the bugzilla report Fabian referenced. :-P
Yeah, but I didn't know that when we talked on IRC =:P
Okay, fixed in -3
Ralph
-
Akemi Yagi -
Fabian Arrotin -
Jörgen Maas -
Ned Slider -
Ralph Angenendt -
Shad L. Lords