[OpenAFS] OpenAFS still in development?
Ted Creedon
tcreedon@easystreet.net
Mon, 22 Jun 2015 07:09:42 -0700
--001a1138132245a77305191bd3c7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
EG OSX has a memory leak that requires weekly rebooting (per apple support)
On Sunday, June 21, 2015, Harald Barth <haba@kth.se> wrote:
>
> > I do not believe that the OpenAFS mailing lists are an appropriate forum
> > to discuss AuriStor. My response to Michael provided details on
> > AuriStor because I felt it was necessary in order to properly answer the
> > implied questions.
>
> What I've learned so far from AuriStor it looks like it could be a
> replacement for OpenAFS on the platforms it's available. And it can
> more as Jeff tells us. If that strategy is good advertising depends
> on "cultural background".
>
> > The question of "supported platforms" is an interesting one because it
> > is very unclear what it means for OpenAFS to "support" a platform. What
> > are the criteria? Is it sufficient to say that if you can build OpenAFS
> > on the OS and hardware architecture that it is "supported"?
>
> Sorry, "supported" was probably a bad choice of word. But I don't know
> if "availabe" or "runable" or "it builds it ships" would be better.
>
> > I am quite sure there are other criteria that could be added to the mix.
>
> I know that you take "supported" very seriously. I would be happy if
> other software vendors (which are not into file systems) would do that
> as well.
>
> > * Linux
> > . Red Hat Enterprise Linux
> > (YFSI is a Red Hat Technology Partner)
> > . Fedora
> > . Debian
> > . Ubuntu
> > * Microsoft Windows
> > * Apple OSX and iOS
> > * Oracle Solaris
> > * IBM AIX
> > * Android
> >
> > Servers are supported everywhere but on Windows, iOS and Android but the
> > performance varies significantly based upon the OS release, processor
> > architecture, and underlying hardware so there are combinations that we
> > recommend and those we do not.
> >
> > The failure to list an OS family or Linux distribution does not imply
> > that YFSI will not support AuriStor on that platform. It only implies
> > that there has been insufficient customer interest to this point for
> > YFSI to expend the necessary resources on development, testing and
> > certification (where applicable.)
>
> Thanks for the list. I guess on "the main HW" which is amd64 for most
> of the OSes above. Both at work and privately I run OpenAFS on
> platforms that are not on the list and even in the future will not
> have much "customer interest".
>
> > In the end software development has to be a partnership between those
> > that build and those that deploy. If those that deploy do not fund
> > those that build there will not be sufficient development hours and
> > talent to build the solutions those that deploy require.
>
> I see that this partnership has stopped working in many places. It
> makes me sad.
>
> > P.S. My apologies for the long reply.
>
> You don't need to apologise.
>
> Harald.
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> OpenAFS-info@openafs.org <javascript:;>
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>
--001a1138132245a77305191bd3c7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
EG OSX has a memory leak that requires weekly rebooting (per apple support)=
<br><br>On Sunday, June 21, 2015, Harald Barth <<a href=3D"mailto:haba@k=
th.se">haba@kth.se</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
> I do not believe that the OpenAFS mailing lists are an appropriate for=
um<br>
> to discuss AuriStor.=C2=A0 My response to Michael provided details on<=
br>
> AuriStor because I felt it was necessary in order to properly answer t=
he<br>
> implied questions.<br>
<br>
What I've learned so far from AuriStor it looks like it could be a<br>
replacement for OpenAFS on the platforms it's available. And it can<br>
more as Jeff tells us. If that strategy is good advertising depends<br>
on "cultural background".<br>
<br>
> The question of "supported platforms" is an interesting one =
because it<br>
> is very unclear what it means for OpenAFS to "support" a pla=
tform.=C2=A0 What<br>
> are the criteria?=C2=A0 Is it sufficient to say that if you can build =
OpenAFS<br>
> on the OS and hardware architecture that it is "supported"?<=
br>
<br>
Sorry, "supported" was probably a bad choice of word. But I don&#=
39;t know<br>
if "availabe" or "runable" or "it builds it ships&=
quot; would be better.<br>
<br>
> I am quite sure there are other criteria that could be added to the mi=
x.<br>
<br>
I know that you take "supported" very seriously. I would be happy=
if<br>
other software vendors (which are not into file systems) would do that<br>
as well.<br>
<br>
>=C2=A0 * Linux<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 . Red Hat Enterprise Linux<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (YFSI is a Red Hat Technology Partner)<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 . Fedora<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 . Debian<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 . Ubuntu<br>
>=C2=A0 * Microsoft Windows<br>
>=C2=A0 * Apple OSX and iOS<br>
>=C2=A0 * Oracle Solaris<br>
>=C2=A0 * IBM AIX<br>
>=C2=A0 * Android<br>
><br>
> Servers are supported everywhere but on Windows, iOS and Android but t=
he<br>
> performance varies significantly based upon the OS release, processor<=
br>
> architecture, and underlying hardware so there are combinations that w=
e<br>
> recommend and those we do not.<br>
><br>
> The failure to list an OS family or Linux distribution does not imply<=
br>
> that YFSI will not support AuriStor on that platform.=C2=A0 It only im=
plies<br>
> that there has been insufficient customer interest to this point for<b=
r>
> YFSI to expend the necessary resources on development, testing and<br>
> certification (where applicable.)<br>
<br>
Thanks for the list. I guess on "the main HW" which is amd64 for =
most<br>
of the OSes above. Both at work and privately I run OpenAFS on<br>
platforms that are not on the list and even in the future will not<br>
have much "customer interest".<br>
<br>
> In the end software development has to be a partnership between those<=
br>
> that build and those that deploy.=C2=A0 If those that deploy do not fu=
nd<br>
> those that build there will not be sufficient development hours and<br=
>
> talent to build the solutions those that deploy require.<br>
<br>
I see that this partnership has stopped working in many places. It<br>
makes me sad.<br>
<br>
> P.S. My apologies for the long reply.<br>
<br>
You don't need to apologise.<br>
<br>
Harald.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenAFS-info mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"javascript:;" onclick=3D"_e(event, 'cvml', 'OpenAFS-=
info@openafs.org')">OpenAFS-info@openafs.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info" target=
=3D"_blank">https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info</a><br>
</blockquote>
--001a1138132245a77305191bd3c7--