Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <po...@debian.org> writes: > On 16/12/15 00:12, Ferenc Wagner wrote: > >> Niko Tyni <nt...@debian.org> writes: >> >>> So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as >>> discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker >>> package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker >>> would be broken by the libdlm update? >> >> No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package. I'm >> already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they >> can be uploaded. Both will go through NEW though, so it will take some >> time. > > I can speed things up if they block a transition... Got an eta for this?
That sounds useful! I expect to get pacemaker_1.1.13-1 ready for upload today, taking some shortcuts. I'll try to contact my usual sponsor, but other interested parties can also step in. :) If no serious issue surfaces during this process, we can quickly repeat for DLM. >> Then LVM will have to be rebuilt against the new DLM, and you >> will be free to kick redhat-cluster out of the archive (I hope nothing >> else depends on it). > > Checking reverse dependencies... > # Broken Depends: > gfs2-utils: gfs2-cluster [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips mipsel powerpc > ppc64el s390x] > gfs2-utils [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips mipsel powerpc > ppc64el s390x] > lvm2: clvm [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips mips64el mipsel powerpc ppc64el > s390x] > > # Broken Build-Depends: > gfs2-utils: libccs-dev (>= 3.1.0) > libcman-dev (>= 3.1.0) > libdlm-dev (>= 3.1.0) > libdlmcontrol-dev (>= 3.1.0) > libfence-dev (>= 3.1.0) > liblogthread-dev (>= 3.1.0) > lvm2: libcman-dev (> 2) > libdlm-dev (> 2) > ocfs2-tools: libdlm-dev > libdlmcontrol-dev Thanks. We will take care of gfs2-utils and ocfs2-tools soon, those are also maintained by the HA team. -- Regards, Feri.
