From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AAB97A55B for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:26:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4C567286EB for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:26:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:26:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F1C1A40EFF for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:26:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5d8b311a-b415-81a9-9ed7-55ef5dbaecf3@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:26:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Aaron Lauterer , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20220704150543.523740-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> From: Stefan Sterz In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.053 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager] fix: make 'ceph-volume' conditional on quincy install X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:26:38 -0000 On 7/4/22 17:25, Aaron Lauterer wrote: > With pve-manager 7.2-6, installing pacific will fail very qickly, as > the package 'ceph-volume' cannot be found. > > Tested this patch by installing pacific and quincy. > > One comment inline > > Tested-By: Aaron Lauterer > > On 7/4/22 17:05, Stefan Sterz wrote: >> when installing non-quincy versions, 'ceph-volume' is not contained in >> the respective repositories and, thus, the install process would fail. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Sterz >> --- >> tested this by installing ceph pacific and quincy, but my setup wasn't >> really clean so i ran into some unrelated issues. >> >>   PVE/CLI/pveceph.pm | 5 ++++- >>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/PVE/CLI/pveceph.pm b/PVE/CLI/pveceph.pm >> index a85df130..8e6c8667 100755 >> --- a/PVE/CLI/pveceph.pm >> +++ b/PVE/CLI/pveceph.pm >> @@ -176,13 +176,16 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method ({ >>       my @ceph_packages = qw( >>           ceph >>           ceph-common >> -        ceph-volume >>           ceph-mds >>           ceph-fuse >>           gdisk >>           nvme-cli >>       ); >>   +    if ($cephver eq 'quincy') { > Wouldn't it be better to check if we are not installing octopus & > pacific? Then it will work for any newer Ceph version as well. Once we > do not support octopus and pacific anymore, we can add 'ceph-volume' > unconditionally to the list of packages to install. > yeah that sounds sensible, give me a minute :) >> +        push @ceph_packages, 'ceph-volume'; >> +    } >> + >>       print "start installation\n"; >>         # this flag helps to determine when apt is actually done >> installing (vs. partial extracing)