settingsLogin | Registersettings

[openstack-dev] Minimum version of shred in our supported distros?

0 votes

Hi,

nova.virt.libvirt.storage.lvm.clear_volume() has a comment that we could
use shred to zero out volumes efficiently if we could assume that shred
8.22 was in all our downstream distros [1]. shred 8.22 shipped in 2013 [2].

Can we assume that thing now? xenial appears to ship with 8.25 for example.
If so, we could drop a reasonably complicated caller of dd, and it would
make moving to privsep a tiny bit easier.

Thanks,
Michael

1:
https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova/tree/nova/virt/libvirt/storage/lvm.py#n219
2: http://savannah.gnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=7815


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
asked Aug 21, 2017 in openstack-dev by Michael_Still (16,180 points)   3 5 13

8 Responses

0 votes

Specifically we could do something like this:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/495532

Michael

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Michael Still mikal@stillhq.com wrote:

Hi,

nova.virt.libvirt.storage.lvm.clear_volume() has a comment that we could
use shred to zero out volumes efficiently if we could assume that shred
8.22 was in all our downstream distros [1]. shred 8.22 shipped in 2013 [2].

Can we assume that thing now? xenial appears to ship with 8.25 for
example. If so, we could drop a reasonably complicated caller of dd, and it
would make moving to privsep a tiny bit easier.

Thanks,
Michael

1: https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova/tree/nova/
virt/libvirt/storage/lvm.py#n219
2: http://savannah.gnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=7815


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Aug 20, 2017 by Michael_Still (16,180 points)   3 5 13
0 votes

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 03:43:22PM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
Hi,

nova.virt.libvirt.storage.lvm.clear_volume() has a comment that we could
use shred to zero out volumes efficiently if we could assume that shred
8.22 was in all our downstream distros [1]. shred 8.22 shipped in 2013 [2].

Can we assume that thing now? xenial appears to ship with 8.25 for example.
If so, we could drop a reasonably complicated caller of dd, and it would
make moving to privsep a tiny bit easier.

To find this out is part science and part guesswork.

Starting with:
https://github.com/openstack/requirements#finding-distro-status

I get the following:

Xenial: [ 8.25 ]
https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=coreutils&searchon=names&suite=xenial-updates&section=all
Fedora: [ 8.27 ]
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/coreutils
Gentoo: [ 8.27 ]
https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-apps/coreutils
RHEL7 - Centos 7: [ 8.22 ]
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/coreutils-8.22-18.el7.x86_64.rpm
opensuse: [ No idea ]
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/coreutils
But pages like:
https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2013/suse-ru-20130546-1.html
imply that 8.12 is still a thing in SLES-11

So while we support SLES 11 I don't think we can make that assumption.
Which of course begs the follow-up question which distros do we care
about.

Yours Tony.


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

responded Aug 21, 2017 by Tony_Breeds (19,660 points)   3 6 10
0 votes

If there's really only one distro which hasn't updated, I'd also be
inclined to try and push them to update before they move to Queens. Surely
that's a thing we can ask them nicely to do?

Michael

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Tony Breeds tony@bakeyournoodle.com
wrote:

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 03:43:22PM +1000, Michael Still wrote:

Hi,

nova.virt.libvirt.storage.lvm.clear_volume() has a comment that we could
use shred to zero out volumes efficiently if we could assume that shred
8.22 was in all our downstream distros [1]. shred 8.22 shipped in 2013
[2].

Can we assume that thing now? xenial appears to ship with 8.25 for
example.
If so, we could drop a reasonably complicated caller of dd, and it would
make moving to privsep a tiny bit easier.

To find this out is part science and part guesswork.

Starting with:
https://github.com/openstack/requirements#finding-distro-status

I get the following:

Xenial: [ 8.25 ]
https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=coreutils&
searchon=names&suite=xenial-updates&section=all
Fedora: [ 8.27 ]
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/coreutils
Gentoo: [ 8.27 ]
https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-apps/coreutils
RHEL7 - Centos 7: [ 8.22 ]
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/
coreutils-8.22-18.el7.x86_64.rpm
opensuse: [ No idea ]
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/coreutils
But pages like:
https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2013/suse-
ru-20130546-1.html
imply that 8.12 is still a thing in SLES-11

So while we support SLES 11 I don't think we can make that assumption.
Which of course begs the follow-up question which distros do we care
about.

Yours Tony.


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Aug 21, 2017 by Michael_Still (16,180 points)   3 5 13
0 votes

On 17-08-21 10:20:11, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 03:43:22PM +1000, Michael Still wrote:

Hi,

nova.virt.libvirt.storage.lvm.clear_volume() has a comment that we could
use shred to zero out volumes efficiently if we could assume that shred
8.22 was in all our downstream distros [1]. shred 8.22 shipped in 2013 [2].

Can we assume that thing now? xenial appears to ship with 8.25 for example.
If so, we could drop a reasonably complicated caller of dd, and it would
make moving to privsep a tiny bit easier.

To find this out is part science and part guesswork.

Starting with:
https://github.com/openstack/requirements#finding-distro-status

I get the following:

Xenial: [ 8.25 ]
https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=coreutils&searchon=names&suite=xenial-updates&section=all
Fedora: [ 8.27 ]
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/coreutils

Stable on gentoo is 8.25 though, but that still matches xenial.

Gentoo: [ 8.27 ]
https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-apps/coreutils
RHEL7 - Centos 7: [ 8.22 ]
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/7/os/x86_64/Packages/coreutils-8.22-18.el7.x86_64.rpm
opensuse: [ No idea ]
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/coreutils
But pages like:
https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2013/suse-ru-20130546-1.html
imply that 8.12 is still a thing in SLES-11

So while we support SLES 11 I don't think we can make that assumption.
Which of course begs the follow-up question which distros do we care
about.

Yours Tony.


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

--
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

responded Aug 21, 2017 by prometheanfire_at_ge (6,880 points)   1 4 5
0 votes

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:40:31AM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
If there's really only one distro which hasn't updated, I'd also be
inclined to try and push them to update before they move to Queens. Surely
that's a thing we can ask them nicely to do?

It might also be that SLES-11 isn't a thing we need to care about[1] and
SLES-12 is fine. I guess give it a few days to give the SLES folks a
chance to chime in.

Yours Tony.

[1] In the same way that we don't track RHEL-6


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

responded Aug 21, 2017 by Tony_Breeds (19,660 points)   3 6 10
0 votes

Hey,

On 21.08.2017 02:59, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:40:31AM +1000, Michael Still wrote:

If there's really only one distro which hasn't updated, I'd also be
inclined to try and push them to update before they move to Queens. Surely
that's a thing we can ask them nicely to do?

It might also be that SLES-11 isn't a thing we need to care about[1] and
SLES-12 is fine. I guess give it a few days to give the SLES folks a
chance to chime in.

We do not need to care about SLE11. And SLE12 and openSUSE-Leap-42 all
have coreutils > 8.22 .

Cheers,

Tom


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Aug 21, 2017 by tbechtold_at_suse.co (1,680 points)   2
0 votes

On 8/20/2017 1:11 AM, Michael Still wrote:
Specifically we could do something like this:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/495532

Sounds like we're OK with doing this in Queens given the other
discussion in this thread. However, this is part of a much larger
series. It looks like it doesn't need to be though, so could you split
this out and we could just merge it on it's own?

--

Thanks,

Matt


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Aug 21, 2017 by mriedemos_at_gmail.c (15,720 points)   2 4 7
0 votes

But to do that I'd have to learn how to use git and then you wouldn't be
forced to take the 17 unrelated patches!

You see where I'm going with this right?

An alternative would be to move it to the start of that series before the
-2 of doom.

Michael

On 22 Aug. 2017 2:55 am, "Matt Riedemann" mriedemos@gmail.com wrote:

On 8/20/2017 1:11 AM, Michael Still wrote:

Specifically we could do something like this:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/495532

Sounds like we're OK with doing this in Queens given the other discussion
in this thread. However, this is part of a much larger series. It looks
like it doesn't need to be though, so could you split this out and we could
just merge it on it's own?

--

Thanks,

Matt


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
responded Aug 21, 2017 by Michael_Still (16,180 points)   3 5 13
...