Fix #11371: Firefly's RPMs' Epoch is lower than that in RHEL base - devops - Ceph

Actions

Copy link

Fix #11371

closed

Firefly's RPMs' Epoch is lower than that in RHEL base

Added by Ken Dreyer about 9 years ago. Updated about 6 years ago.

Status:

Rejected

Priority:

Normal

Assignee:

Category:

Target version:

% Done:

Source:

other

Tags:

Backport:

Reviewed:

Affected Versions:

ceph-qa-suite:

Pull request ID:

Crash signature (v1):

Crash signature (v2):

Description

In a new minimal CentOS 7.1 VM (that's not using EPEL at all), ceph.com's 0.80.9 fails to install.

# yum -y install http://ceph.com/rpm-firefly/el7/noarch/ceph-release-1-0.el7.noarch.rpm
# yum install ceph
Error: Package: ceph-0.80.9-0.el7.centos.x86_64 (Ceph)
           Requires: librbd1 = 0.80.9-0.el7.centos
           Available: librbd1-0.80.6-0.el7.centos.x86_64 (Ceph)
               librbd1 = 0.80.6-0.el7.centos
           Available: librbd1-0.80.7-0.el7.centos.x86_64 (Ceph)
               librbd1 = 0.80.7-0.el7.centos
           Available: librbd1-0.80.8-0.el7.centos.x86_64 (Ceph)
               librbd1 = 0.80.8-0.el7.centos
           Available: librbd1-0.80.9-0.el7.centos.x86_64 (Ceph)
               librbd1 = 0.80.9-0.el7.centos
           Installing: 1:librbd1-0.80.7-2.el7.x86_64 (base)
               librbd1 = 1:0.80.7-2.el7

The problem is that RHEL Base's ceph libraries have the Epoch set to "1", whereas the upstream (ceph.com) Firefly packages have Epoch unset. The "Epoch: 1" change is in Giant (0.87.2) and Hammer (0.94), but not Firefly.

We had originally backported the "Epoch: 1" change to Firefly, but I reverted it because of some conflicts between Inktank's original product release process and the new Ceph Storage product release process within Red Hat.

Now that things have stabilized in that regard and we can handle this situation better going forward, I think it's ok for ceph.com's Firefly to have the epoch bump as well.