Hello Ken,

Thanks for your reply, unfortunately I don't have the time to get a closer insight

into this anytime soon nor am I a packaging ninja :(

I'll keep my eyes open on the list and see if I can get some time available sometime soon.

Best regards

On 06/08/2018 04:55 AM, Ken Dreyer wrote:

It's on my todo list, towards the very bottom :(

Would you be interested in joining the CentOS Storage SIG and helping? Do you have a CBS account set up?

• Ken

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:02 AM, Tobias Urdin tobias.urdin@crystone.com wrote:

...

Hello Ceph Storage SIG,

I'm researching support for Ceph Mimic for implementations in OpenStack projects.

Is anybody working on CentOS packages for Ceph Mimic? i.e not the upstream EL7 packages on download.ceph.com

Best regards

---

CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

---

CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Hello Thomas,

You are awesome, thank you very much for this! I'll let my colleague, that is working on Ceph right now, know about this and hopefully he'll have time to test the x86_64 package for you.

Best regards

On 06/09/2018 08:39 AM, Thomas Oulevey wrote:

Dear All,

...

Thanks for your reply, unfortunately I don't have the time to get a closer insight

As I had spare cycle I fixed the spec file and rebuilt/tagged dependencies.

I tried to rebuild ceph-13.2.0 for all enabled arches.

The status is the following :

• x86_64 OK [1]
• aarch64 / failing . logs can be found at [2] - [3]
• ppc64le OK [4]

You can check the results at http://cbs.centos.org and download TEST packages from there.

If you have experience with aarch64/ceph and you understand what is the issue please let us know.

I tried to lower the number of cpu/ram to 4 / 1G per process on the aarch64 builder. Max ram too was limited to half of the builder node capacity (8GB). No luck.

Please read the README on the sig-storage7-ceph-mimic branch on github [5] for the detailed changes from upstream.

I'll wait for feedback on the mailing list and continue to investigate.

TODO:

• fix aarch64 build
• import in github new dependencies srpms
• what is our strategy for python3 support (should we leave it off ? or

investigate a way to have python3-* in a CentOS SIG ? scl ? I didn't check how rhcs does it. All comments/ideas are welcomed!)

• build centos-release package for mimic

Any feedback on python3 support is appreciated before we push packages to -testing repository.

I'd say leav it off and do not block on it, this would require cross-SIG discussion to come up with the a solution. In Cloud SIG we do not plan python3 support on EL7.

Cheers, Alan