[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Redhat RPM Builds on SMP Platform

To: "Michael Pike" <mpike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Redhat RPM Builds on SMP Platform
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:04:05 -0500
Cc: "XFS Mailing List" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: Message from "Michael Pike" <mpike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> of "Wed, 04 Oct 2000 07:55:02 MDT." <003c01c02e0a$b1d8cce0$8a5bdfa1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Greetings all... let me first say you are the biggest bunch of geniouses I
> have met :)  After messing with several large file system packages for
> Linux, XFS, even though in beta, has been the best out of them all, and a
> true life saver in my organization! :)

The one thing about XFS is that most of the filesystem code has been running
for years on thousands of machines.

> The docs on the page were great, and the install went perfect... and XFS is
> what I am pushing to all of our clients (and we have a lot).

Having said what I just did, I would add a word of caution here - because
we are tied to a 2.4 test kernel you are also recommending to your
customers that they use the rest of the 2.4 kernel in production. This
may not be a wise move just yet.

> I do have one question though, my expertise does not lie in Kernel
> compilations and such, so here we go....
> On our production machine we run VMWare for thin client access.... after I
> installed the Kernel 2.4.test with XFS support from the RPMS rpms on the sgi
> website, the system came up, and ran fine... VMWare needed to be recompiled
> though... so, during the recompile it tells me the Kernel headers I have are
> not compatible with my current running Kernel (I was at 2.2.14 - now at
> 2.4.test-XFSi686smp) which makes sense... so when I loaded the
> xfsi386kernelheaders.rpm file, and tried to compile again, I got the same
> error message, only this time is said the headers were for 2.4.test-XFSi386,
> and I was running 2.4.testi686SMP)  (the key being here SMP)...
> Do you guys have available kernel headers for the SMP kernel, or should I go
> ahead and just use the single processor kernel and stick with the stock
> kernel header rpms?

The header files are not themselves changed by SMP vs non-SMP in the
kernel build, so the actual contents of the rpm would be the same. I
am not familiar with vmware beyond what it is, especially not how you
can build it. I suspect vmware does not currently support a 2.4 kernel
in any shape or form. It sounds like you are hitting some checks early
in the build process - and once you got past them, then, depending on
what is really getting rebuilt here, I suspect there could be compile
errors all over the place. These sound more like questions to ask of
vmware than us.

> It's a Dell PowerEdge 6300, 1 gig of ram, and 4 18 gig drives, dual PIII
> Xeon's... I would prefer to keep the SMP, but the file size issue is more
> important at this stage so I could give up SMP if I had to...
> Any help appreciated, and keep up the great work!

Thanks for trying XFS.


> Mike

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>