[LU-9215] build: Re-add the lustre-devel package.

• Type: Bug
• Resolution: Fixed
• Priority: Major
• Fix Version/s: Lustre 2.14.0
• Severity: 3
• Assignee: James A Simmons
• Reporter: parinay v kondekar (Inactive)

Description

This re-adds the lustre-devel package.

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-9897 Tracking of lustre library improvements.

Comments

[James A Simmons]

Andreas I can do that. The only reason I brought this up is that people earlier in this ticket asked for it. Also patch https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/25997 seemed to be heading into that direction instead of handling the user land devel package handling. Cory those *.pc inspired me to develop the patch that just landed 

[Cory Spitz]

simmonsja, FYI: https://github.com/Cray/lustre/blob/cray-2.12-int/cray-obs/cray-lnet.pc and https://github.com/Cray/lustre/blob/cray-2.12-int/cray-obs/cray-lustre-api-devel.pc

[Andreas Dilger]

James, that could go under a separate ticket? My understanding is that would be something quite different - building out-of-tree kernel modules, rather than the patch which just landed, which is for userspace tools that need access to the interface/protocol structures and constants and such?

[James A Simmons]

Actually one more patch. People want the ability to build against external LND drivers.

[Peter Jones]

Aa true man of the people Landed for 2.14

[Gerrit Updater]

Oleg Drokin ([e-mail]) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/40728/
Subject: LU-9215 build: Re-add the lustre-devel package
Project: fs/lustre-release
Branch: master
Current Patch Set:
Commit: 16af4e5ed634942cf6d8a847832684c5542a956c

[James A Simmons]

By popular demand I added back lustre-devel for user land handling. As for what people are requesting that is kmod-lustre-devel rpm that you want. 

[Gerrit Updater]

James Simmons ([e-mail]) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/40728
Subject: LU-9215 build: Re-add the lustre-devel package
Project: fs/lustre-release
Branch: master
Current Patch Set: 1
Commit: 1d71647c5ce75d7d7dbd464e218764b7314b7811

[Andreas Dilger]

I don't think there is any question about the kernel or Lustre APIs being kept stable,, but that doesn't prevent modules from having conditional compilation as we already do with Lustre today.

I don't object in principle to our-of-tree modules being built, but agree that "lustre-devel" is maybe not a good package name unless it also includes both the in-kernel and userspace development headers.

[James A Simmons]

That is not how devel rpms work. They normally contain only static libraries and user land headers. Your ptl4lnd driver is a kernel driver so its going to always be dependent on the lustre kernel code  Their is no guarantee that the internal kernel apis will remain stable. In fact more changes to the LNet core are in the pipe line.