[Web10g-user] O/S and kernel/patch versions

[Tom Throckmorton]

Hello Kevin; cross-posting to perfsonar developers, and comments below...

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Kevin Kawaguchi <ktkawaguchi at ucdavis.edu>wrote:

>  Good Afternoon Everybody,
>
> We are about to build a web10g server for some researchers.  We are
> typically a RHEL/CentOS shop so kernel wise we would be behind the times on
> recent web10g patches.  As an example PerfSonar is based on CentOS and has
> a kernel version of something like 2.6.32-358 while the web10g patches are
> way into the 3.x (and the oldest web10g patch is 2.6.38).
>
> It looks like the best fit for a distro would be Fedora 18 as it is still
> RH and uses the 3.6 kernel train based upon this wiki:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Fedora_versions#Version_history
>
>
FWIW, Fedora 17/18 are currently shipping 3.8; the 0.6.2 patch is for
3.6.0-3.8.0, so *should* still work with either of those.


>  We are proposing:
> 1. install FC 18
> 2. d/l base kernel.org 3.6.0-ish source
> 3. d/l web10g 0.6.2 or newer patch
> 4. figure out where patch applies in kernel.org source
> 5. d/l fedora 3.6.0-ish kernel source
> 6. modify web10g 0.6.2 patch into fedora source
> 7. compile new fedora source based patched kernel and cross fingers
>

You can probably omit step #2 (unless you are *really* into reading kernel
source); the comparison that is most important is the web10g patch to the
kernel source for your compilation target.


> I know documentation says that a raw ".0" kernel.org source is the
> supported method and that using other sources *may* work, but we are
> thinking it may pay off to use distro source to keep things in line with
> what is expected and configured in the distro.  On this path, are there any
> recommendations or experiences that would give this the best chance to pay
> off with a reasonably reliable system for our researchers?
>
> Have other folks done anything like this successfully?
>

I've done this with web100, as well as mixing distro + upstream distro
kernel, but have not w/ the web10g patchset.  Regardless of the patch,
starting with and patching a kernel source and version that matched the
distro was the best combination for me, in terms of things working and
overall stability, whether using Fedora or CentOS.

You have a few other things to consider, like how you're going to maintain
updates.  I encourage you to look at mock* for rebuilding your kernel
package; the up-front investment will pay off if you're intending to use
these systems for a while, and you'll also get to uncross your fingers at
step #7 ;-)

-tt

* http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/Mock


> What are the plans with respect to working with the PerfSonar/NDT/NPAD
> folks especially since they are Cent based?  I understand a patch for
> 2.6.32-358 would seem like a step backwards.
>
> Thank You!
>
> Kevin Kawaguchi
> UCDavis Network Operations Center
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web10g-user mailing list
> Web10g-user at web10g.org
> https://lists.psc.edu/mailman/listinfo/web10g-user
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE visit https://lists.psc.edu/mailman/unsubscribe/web10g-user
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.psc.edu/pipermail/web10g-user/attachments/20130429/c1973f54/attachment.html