* boost submodule update
@ 2016-09-29 16:00 Sage Weil
2016-09-29 16:13 ` Alfredo Deza
2016-09-29 22:42 ` Ken Dreyer
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2016-09-29 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ceph-devel
Hi everyone,
Matt has a working boost submodule branch ready; I've pushed it to
wip-boost in ceph.git to ensure the gitbuilders are happy and tagged it
needs-qa.
Just so there are no surprises:
* This change increases the initial checkout + clone time by about
**three minutes**. Boost is structured as several dozen submodules and it
takes a while to clone them all. It's painful on the first checkout, but
fine after that. This pain only applies to developers.
* We are using boost 1.61 + a few things. There are still some
outstanding warnings. They appear to be issues in boost 1.61 itself, and
do not appear to be significant. (And the warnings are in parts of boost
we're not using yet: asio and serialization.)
* There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
but they can if they want.
sage
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-29 16:00 boost submodule update Sage Weil
@ 2016-09-29 16:13 ` Alfredo Deza
2016-09-29 16:27 ` Sage Weil
2016-09-29 22:42 ` Ken Dreyer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Alfredo Deza @ 2016-09-29 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sage Weil; +Cc: ceph-devel
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Matt has a working boost submodule branch ready; I've pushed it to
> wip-boost in ceph.git to ensure the gitbuilders are happy and tagged it
> needs-qa.
>
> Just so there are no surprises:
>
> * This change increases the initial checkout + clone time by about
> **three minutes**. Boost is structured as several dozen submodules and it
> takes a while to clone them all. It's painful on the first checkout, but
> fine after that. This pain only applies to developers.
>
> * We are using boost 1.61 + a few things. There are still some
> outstanding warnings. They appear to be issues in boost 1.61 itself, and
> do not appear to be significant. (And the warnings are in parts of boost
> we're not using yet: asio and serialization.)
>
> * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
> doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
> but they can if they want.
What does this mean for actual builds/releases? It seems there is a
potential for a disconnect between what a developer
expects from the submodule vs. what the distribution may provide.
Or are builds supposed to embed boost and not use the distro-provided version?
>
> sage
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-29 16:13 ` Alfredo Deza
@ 2016-09-29 16:27 ` Sage Weil
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2016-09-29 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alfredo Deza; +Cc: ceph-devel
On Thu, 29 Sep 2016, Alfredo Deza wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Matt has a working boost submodule branch ready; I've pushed it to
> > wip-boost in ceph.git to ensure the gitbuilders are happy and tagged it
> > needs-qa.
> >
> > Just so there are no surprises:
> >
> > * This change increases the initial checkout + clone time by about
> > **three minutes**. Boost is structured as several dozen submodules and it
> > takes a while to clone them all. It's painful on the first checkout, but
> > fine after that. This pain only applies to developers.
> >
> > * We are using boost 1.61 + a few things. There are still some
> > outstanding warnings. They appear to be issues in boost 1.61 itself, and
> > do not appear to be significant. (And the warnings are in parts of boost
> > we're not using yet: asio and serialization.)
> >
> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
> > but they can if they want.
>
> What does this mean for actual builds/releases? It seems there is a
> potential for a disconnect between what a developer
> expects from the submodule vs. what the distribution may provide.
>
> Or are builds supposed to embed boost and not use the distro-provided
> version?
It will link statically by default. In practice almost all of boost is in
headers anyway so there's not much point in dynamic linking.
So, no changes are needed on the build end of things.
sage
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-29 16:00 boost submodule update Sage Weil
2016-09-29 16:13 ` Alfredo Deza
@ 2016-09-29 22:42 ` Ken Dreyer
2016-09-30 12:42 ` Matt Benjamin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ken Dreyer @ 2016-09-29 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sage Weil; +Cc: ceph-devel
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
> doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
> but they can if they want.
Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
- Ken
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-29 22:42 ` Ken Dreyer
@ 2016-09-30 12:42 ` Matt Benjamin
2016-10-05 2:31 ` Brad Hubbard
2016-10-05 17:23 ` Ken Dreyer
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Matt Benjamin @ 2016-09-30 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ken Dreyer; +Cc: Sage Weil, ceph-devel
Hi Ken,
I'm doubtful that case will arise in practice?
Matt
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>
> Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:42:48 PM
> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
> > but they can if they want.
>
> Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
> Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
>
> Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
>
> - Ken
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Matt Benjamin
Red Hat, Inc.
315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
tel. 734-707-0660
fax. 734-769-8938
cel. 734-216-5309
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-30 12:42 ` Matt Benjamin
@ 2016-10-05 2:31 ` Brad Hubbard
2016-10-05 13:25 ` Sage Weil
2016-10-05 17:23 ` Ken Dreyer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Brad Hubbard @ 2016-10-05 2:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Benjamin; +Cc: Ken Dreyer, Sage Weil, ceph-devel
I acknowledge what Sage says about most of boost being header only but I still
feel compelled to offer some input here.
https://www.akkadia.org/drepper/no_static_linking.html
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html-single/Developer_Guide/index.html#lib.compatibility.static
I guess we are aware of these pain points and have decided "it's worth it"?
--
Cheers,
Brad
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Matt Benjamin <mbenjamin@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> I'm doubtful that case will arise in practice?
>
> Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
>> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>
>> Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:42:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
>> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
>> > but they can if they want.
>>
>> Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
>> Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
>>
>> Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
>> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
>>
>> - Ken
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
> --
> Matt Benjamin
> Red Hat, Inc.
> 315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
> Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
>
> http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
>
> tel. 734-707-0660
> fax. 734-769-8938
> cel. 734-216-5309
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-10-05 2:31 ` Brad Hubbard
@ 2016-10-05 13:25 ` Sage Weil
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sage Weil @ 2016-10-05 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brad Hubbard; +Cc: Matt Benjamin, Ken Dreyer, ceph-devel
On Wed, 5 Oct 2016, Brad Hubbard wrote:
> I acknowledge what Sage says about most of boost being header only but I still
> feel compelled to offer some input here.
>
> https://www.akkadia.org/drepper/no_static_linking.html
> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7-Beta/html-single/Developer_Guide/index.html#lib.compatibility.static
>
> I guess we are aware of these pain points and have decided "it's worth it"?
I don't see anything on those lists that would meaningfully apply to (the
small fraction of) boost (that links dynamically). I'm not really the
expert here, though... anybody else?
sage
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Brad
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Matt Benjamin <mbenjamin@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > I'm doubtful that case will arise in practice?
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
> >> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:42:48 PM
> >> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
> >> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
> >> > but they can if they want.
> >>
> >> Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
> >> Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
> >>
> >> Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
> >> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
> >>
> >> - Ken
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Matt Benjamin
> > Red Hat, Inc.
> > 315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
> > Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
> >
> > http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
> >
> > tel. 734-707-0660
> > fax. 734-769-8938
> > cel. 734-216-5309
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-09-30 12:42 ` Matt Benjamin
2016-10-05 2:31 ` Brad Hubbard
@ 2016-10-05 17:23 ` Ken Dreyer
2016-10-05 17:27 ` Matt Benjamin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ken Dreyer @ 2016-10-05 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Benjamin; +Cc: Sage Weil, ceph-devel
Hi Matt,
I'm not following? You're doubtful that what will arise?
- Ken
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Matt Benjamin <mbenjamin@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> I'm doubtful that case will arise in practice?
>
> Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
>> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>
>> Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:42:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option. I
>> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to lag,
>> > but they can if they want.
>>
>> Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
>> Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
>>
>> Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
>> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
>>
>> - Ken
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
> --
> Matt Benjamin
> Red Hat, Inc.
> 315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
> Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
>
> http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
>
> tel. 734-707-0660
> fax. 734-769-8938
> cel. 734-216-5309
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: boost submodule update
2016-10-05 17:23 ` Ken Dreyer
@ 2016-10-05 17:27 ` Matt Benjamin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Matt Benjamin @ 2016-10-05 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ken Dreyer; +Cc: Sage Weil, ceph-devel
Sorry. The outcome of upstream discussion was to prefer to use the bundled Boost unless overridden. It might make sense to override when we know a platform has a Boost version >= the expected, and the complement of that case I thought likely not to happen.
Matt
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
> To: "Matt Benjamin" <mbenjamin@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>, "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:23:20 PM
> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> I'm not following? You're doubtful that what will arise?
>
> - Ken
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Matt Benjamin <mbenjamin@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi Ken,
> >
> > I'm doubtful that case will arise in practice?
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Ken Dreyer" <kdreyer@redhat.com>
> >> To: "Sage Weil" <sweil@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: "ceph-devel" <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:42:48 PM
> >> Subject: Re: boost submodule update
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > * There is still the option to use a system boost via a cmake option.
> >> > I
> >> > doubt anyone will opt for this in practice given the distros tend to
> >> > lag,
> >> > but they can if they want.
> >>
> >> Can we have it automatically enable the system boost if it's > 1.6.1?
> >> Otherwise I'm afraid no one will set WITH_SYSTEM_BOOST :)
> >>
> >> Fedora 26 or 27 will probably have Boost 1.6.2+
> >> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1374088)
> >>
> >> - Ken
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
> >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Matt Benjamin
> > Red Hat, Inc.
> > 315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
> > Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
> >
> > http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
> >
> > tel. 734-707-0660
> > fax. 734-769-8938
> > cel. 734-216-5309
>
--
Matt Benjamin
Red Hat, Inc.
315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103
http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage
tel. 734-707-0660
fax. 734-769-8938
cel. 734-216-5309
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-10-05 17:27 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-09-29 16:00 boost submodule update Sage Weil
2016-09-29 16:13 ` Alfredo Deza
2016-09-29 16:27 ` Sage Weil
2016-09-29 22:42 ` Ken Dreyer
2016-09-30 12:42 ` Matt Benjamin
2016-10-05 2:31 ` Brad Hubbard
2016-10-05 13:25 ` Sage Weil
2016-10-05 17:23 ` Ken Dreyer
2016-10-05 17:27 ` Matt Benjamin
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.