Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix for issue #171 #203

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Feb 10, 2016
Merged

Fix for issue #171 #203

merged 8 commits into from
Feb 10, 2016

Conversation

fmeppo
Copy link
Contributor

@fmeppo fmeppo commented Jan 25, 2016

This pull provides a patch to ceph-disk, allowing the permissions to be overridden. A disk-type OSD will then run with perms ceph:disk, so it can get raw block dev access for the journal file.

@Ulexus
Copy link
Contributor

Ulexus commented Jan 25, 2016

This seems like a good idea, and I appreciate the effort. I'd rather see this patch go to the upstream ceph-disk rather than maintaining a local patch. Have you tried there yet?

@fmeppo
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmeppo commented Jan 25, 2016

The upstream project will get a pull request just as soon as I'm done
fixing the man page for ceph-disk. :-)

Figured I'd at least get something to ceph-docker in the meantime, since
anything I push upstream may not make it to infernalis...

Mike Shuey

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Seán C. McCord notifications@github.com
wrote:

This seems like a good idea, and I appreciate the effort. I'd rather see
this patch go to the upstream ceph-disk rather than maintaining a local
patch. Have you tried there yet?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#203 (comment).

@Ulexus
Copy link
Contributor

Ulexus commented Jan 25, 2016

Sounds good. I'm a bit concerned with the local patch adding brittleness, but at least that should fail at image-build time, if it doesn't patch cleanly.

@leseb , thoughts?

@leseb
Copy link
Member

leseb commented Jan 26, 2016

Same concern here, I'd prefer to have this getting merged in ceph-disk upstream first. However I understand that this might need some time to get through.
In the meantime, please link the PR on ceph upstream to fix this and add a message to explain that the patch needs to go away as soon as it's merged and backported :)

Thanks!

@fmeppo fmeppo force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from 5be1b3c to 89ed955 Compare February 10, 2016 03:41
@fmeppo
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmeppo commented Feb 10, 2016

This patch has been rebased into upstream, and there's a pull request (#7351) in queue. Also added a few comments about that, indicating it can be removed after the PR is done.

@@ -7,8 +7,11 @@
FROM ceph/base
MAINTAINER Sébastien Han "seb@redhat.com"

# patch is only needed until PR #7531 is merged in ceph/ceph (and backported
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/7531/7351/

@leseb
Copy link
Member

leseb commented Feb 10, 2016

@fmeppo thanks for getting back to us on this. Just fix the PR ID in the code and we should be good to go. Right @Ulexus?

@fmeppo
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmeppo commented Feb 10, 2016

Yeah...sorry about that. Comment fixed.

RUN apt-get update && apt-get -y install runit && \
apt-get clean && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/* /tmp/* /var/tmp/*
apt-get install patch && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

just to be sure, shouldn't we use -y in apt?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It works as-is, but....you're probably right. Committed a fix; it's in the
pull request now.

Mike Shuey

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Leseb notifications@github.com wrote:

In daemon/Dockerfile
#203 (comment):

RUN apt-get update && apt-get -y install runit &&
-apt-get clean && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/* /tmp/* /var/tmp/*

  • apt-get install patch && \

just to be sure, shouldn't we use -y in apt?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-docker/pull/203/files#r52462522.

Mike Shuey added 7 commits February 10, 2016 09:23
Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
previously-initialized disks)

Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
…self)

can be removed.

Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
Signed-off-by: Mike Shuey <shuey@purdue.edu>
@leseb
Copy link
Member

leseb commented Feb 10, 2016

Thanks @fmeppo!

leseb added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 10, 2016
@leseb leseb merged commit 79681c3 into ceph:master Feb 10, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants