While it is true that Alma *also* addresses v2 it offers v3 as *default* as well. So I feel better with alma (because it allows me to run alma10 on older hardware if I pick the x86_64_v2 architecture). Am 01.08.2025 um 09:34 schrieb Alexander Patrakov:
Just as another consideration, AlmaLinux is targeting x86_64 v2, while other RHEL clones target v3. So, basing Ceph builds and containers on AlmaLinux will make containerized builds assembled from these RPMs more compatible with ancient hardware still found in labs, and with test clusters running on misconfigured third-party cloud hypervisors.
On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 3:30 PM Patrick Begou < Patrick.Begou@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr> wrote:
Hi Michel,
and what about using Almalinux for your build ? In my mind Almalinux is closest to REHL as Rocky linux kernels are more advanced. Just to maximize the compatibility of the x86_64 rpm.
Patrick
Le 31/07/2025 à 22:31, Michel Jouvin a écrit :
Hi Dan,
I think it would be a good move. Now that CentOS Stream has been repurposed as a RHEL upstream instead of downstream as it was initially, it really makes sense. I would not expect any trouble for CS users as the backward compatibility is maintained in CS as un RHEL The problem that happened with recent Ceph rebuilds is because CS by design introduces things not yet present in RHEL releases and it's derivatives.
Best regards,
Michel Sent from my mobile Le 31 juillet 2025 18:34:32 Dan van der Ster <dan.vanderster@clyso.com> a écrit :
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 8:06 AM Moritz Baumann <mo@mo.homeip.net> wrote:
I have problems upgrading ceph from
https://download.ceph.com/rpm-19.2.3/el9/x86_64/
and have broken dependencies on host running Almalinux 9.6
So:
ceph orch upgrade start --ceph_version 19.2.3
works, but a dnf --refresh upgrade on ceph nodes gives broken dependencies
ceph-poc1[0]:~# dnf --refresh upgrade ... Error: Problem 1: cannot install the best update candidate for package ceph-common-2:19.2.2-0.el9.x86_64 - nothing provides libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.4.0)(64bit) needed by ceph-common-2:19.2.3-0.el9.x86_64 from Ceph
Thanks for sharing this. The upstream build team is aware of this (and the same issue in reef) and actively are working on a path forward. It's unfortunate that Stream broke compatibility this way -- the team is testing the impact if we move to Rocky 9 going forward for reef/squid.
One concern is if such a change might similarly break our Stream 9 users -- but... are there any Stream 9 users out there?
Cheers, dan
-- Dan van der Ster Ceph Executive Council | CTO @ CLYSO Try our Ceph Analyzer -- https://analyzer.clyso.com/ https://clyso.com | dan.vanderster@clyso.com _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io