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

Packages should provide libglusterfs0 instead of conflicting #32

Closed
nepeat opened this issue Jul 16, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Packages should provide libglusterfs0 instead of conflicting #32

nepeat opened this issue Jul 16, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@nepeat
Copy link

nepeat commented Jul 16, 2019

I propose that glusterfs-common should provide libglusterfs0 instead of conflicting with it because of this conflict pointed out in a Proxmox bug ticket. From what I understand in the ticket, Debian’s libglusterfs0 is conflicting with glusterfs-common instead of being provided by it.

https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2269

@Fabian-Gruenbichler
Copy link

the current situation in Debian Buster is that no packages from the gluster community repositories can be installed unless every stock Debian package that depends on gluster is removed, effectively making the community repos unusable for Debian Buster and later.

please either follow the downstream/distro packaging changes (split out shared libraries into their own packages, instead of shipping them via glusterfs-common) or at least set your package metadata accordingly to stay compatible (e.g., provides/replaces with appropriate versions and package names).

@kalebskeithley
Copy link
Contributor

the current situation in Debian Buster is that no packages from the gluster community repositories can be installed unless every stock Debian package that depends on gluster is removed, effectively making the community repos unusable for Debian Buster and later.

please either follow the downstream/distro packaging changes (split out shared libraries into their own packages, instead of shipping them via glusterfs-common) or at least set your package metadata accordingly to stay compatible (e.g., provides/replaces with appropriate versions and package names).

Are you going to send a PR?

@nepeat
Copy link
Author

nepeat commented Aug 6, 2019

Are you going to send a PR?

Sounds like a good plan but how would I approach each of the branches for Debian? I see there are about 12 branches for Buster and presumably the same for Stretch. Is there a way to update most of them from a single master branch or are all of them edited by hand for each update to upstream?

@kalebskeithley
Copy link
Contributor

kalebskeithley commented Aug 6, 2019

Are you going to send a PR?

Sounds like a good plan but how would I approach each of the branches for Debian? I see there are about 12 branches for Buster and presumably the same for Stretch. Is there a way to update most of them from a single master branch or are all of them edited by hand for each update to upstream?

There isn't. (Blame semiosis ?!?)

I would suggest only fixing buster-glusterfs-5 and buster-glusterfs-6 branches at this point GlusterFS-7 is coming soon, FYI. And glusterfs-4.1 will EOL when -7 is released, so I don't think it's worth bothering with the buster-glusterfs-41branch.

Fabian says it's only buster that's "broken" so I wouldn't bother with changing stretch. At least not until someone says it's an issue.

@kalebskeithley
Copy link
Contributor

Packages for the just released glusterfs-5.9 and glusterfs-6.5 for buster, bullseye, disco, and eoan are all built with new packaging files derived from the latest Debian and Ubuntu packaging files for glusterfs-5 and glusterfs-6. These should now be compatible and interchangeable with the glusterfs packages in the distribution base repos.

buster and bullseye packages are on https://download.gluster.org now. disco and eoan packages are in the Gluster PPA on launchpad now.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants