[CentOS-devel] Centos 8.x, dlm Package unavailable

Stephen John Smoogen

smooge at gmail.com
Wed Sep 16 15:03:17 UTC 2020

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 08:26, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:10 AM Gianluca Cecchi
> <gianluca.cecchi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:41 PM Josh Boyer <jwboyer at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >>
> >>
> >> > Just trying to piece this all together so I can explain to my peers
> the business and community decisions going on here.
> >> >
> >> > Currently someone that set up a cluster with gfs2 in 7 can't do the
> same thing in 8 due to the dlm package missing. That is a loss of
> functionality and seems to indicate it's a bug or intentional reduction in
> feature set.
> >>
> >> It's a bug in CentOS 7 that was kept unfixed.  The feature set from
> >> RHEL 7 and RHEL 8 remains consistent, with it only being available in
> >> the Resilient Storage AddOn.
> >>
> >> josh
> >>
> >
> > Hi Josh,
> > you are talking about RHEL consistency, but the point is CentOS "feature
> set" passing from 7 to 8 that has changed.
> > As I see it:
> > In RH EL 7 there was a dedicated group (as a paid add-on) for Resilient
> storage, providing lvm2-cluster, gfs2, ecc.
> > In CentOS 7 that rpm recompiled yum group was made available to the
> community, so that at time of 7.2 for example I could transparently execute
> on my CentOS system:
> Yes.  I explained why this happened in the original reply.
> > I think it was made for an explicit decision, not by mistake. One of the
> reasons could be the typical bi-directional contribution model, useful for
> both parts, the community and Red Hat to improve their product offering.
> I can't comment on the CentOS side directly, but I do know that the
> collaboration between RHEL and CentOS was still in its early stages
> around that time and often there were surprises to both groups.  I
For the most part there is little in what is delivered onto first
ftp.redhat.com and then git.centos.org about what packages are 'shipped'
and 'not-shipped'. This means that these differences between CentOS and Red
Hat releases have existed in previous CentOS releases for different
packages. Usually by the time someone who had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux
subscriptions found the discrepancy, the package had been shipped and was
considered permanent in CentOS. My understanding that other than by email
communication or a manual audit, the only items that give a clue that
something is not shipped are modules which in their build state tell the
Module Build System what packages are to be included in the compose and
which ones are to be filtered out.

Stephen J Smoogen.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200916/075050d6/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list