Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

zfs: 2.0.2 -> 2.0.3 #112910

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2021
Merged

zfs: 2.0.2 -> 2.0.3 #112910

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2021

Conversation

hmenke
Copy link
Member

@hmenke hmenke commented Feb 12, 2021

Motivation for this change

New upstream release: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/releases/tag/zfs-2.0.3

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@hmenke
Copy link
Member Author

hmenke commented Feb 12, 2021

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 112910 1

6 packages marked as broken and skipped:
  • bareos
  • linuxPackages-libre.zfs
  • linuxPackages-libre.zfsUnstable
  • linuxPackages_latest-libre.zfs
  • linuxPackages_latest-libre.zfsUnstable
  • samba4Full
1 package failed to build:
  • libvmi
55 packages built:
  • ceph
  • ceph-client
  • collectd
  • collectd-data
  • docker-machine-kvm
  • docker-machine-kvm2
  • easysnap
  • gnome3.gnome-boxes
  • libceph
  • libguestfs
  • libguestfs-with-appliance
  • libvirt
  • libvirt-glib
  • linuxPackages.zfs (linuxPackages.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_4_14.zfs (linuxPackages_4_14.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_4_19.zfs (linuxPackages_4_19.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_4_4.zfs (linuxPackages_4_4.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_4_9.zfs (linuxPackages_4_9.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_5_10.zfs (linuxPackages_5_10.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_hardened.zfs (linuxPackages_hardened.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_latest_hardened.zfs (linuxPackages_latest_hardened.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_latest_xen_dom0.zfs (linuxPackages_latest_xen_dom0.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_latest_xen_dom0_hardened.zfs (linuxPackages_latest_xen_dom0_hardened.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_lqx.zfs (linuxPackages_lqx.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_testing_bcachefs.zfs (linuxPackages_testing_bcachefs.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_xen_dom0.zfs (linuxPackages_xen_dom0.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_xen_dom0_hardened.zfs (linuxPackages_xen_dom0_hardened.zfsUnstable)
  • linuxPackages_zen.zfs (linuxPackages_zen.zfsUnstable)
  • minikube
  • minishift
  • nixopsUnstable
  • ocamlPackages.ocaml_libvirt
  • perl530Packages.SysVirt
  • perl532Packages.SysVirt
  • python37Packages.guestfs
  • python37Packages.libvirt
  • python38Packages.guestfs
  • python38Packages.libvirt
  • python39Packages.guestfs
  • python39Packages.libvirt
  • qemu_full
  • rubyPackages.ruby-libvirt
  • rubyPackages_2_5.ruby-libvirt
  • rubyPackages_2_7.ruby-libvirt
  • sanoid
  • terraform-full
  • terraform-provider-libvirt (terraform-providers.libvirt)
  • vagrant
  • virtmanager (virt-manager)
  • virtmanager-qt (virt-manager-qt)
  • virt-top
  • virtviewer (virt-viewer)
  • virtlyst
  • zfs (zfsUnstable)
  • zfstools

@hmenke
Copy link
Member Author

hmenke commented Feb 12, 2021

@jonringer I'm using kernelAtLeast and kernelOlder now to mark ZFS broken on unsupported kernels (supported are 3.10 to 5.10). What do you think?

@hmenke
Copy link
Member Author

hmenke commented Feb 12, 2021

@ofborg test zfs.stable zfs.unstable

@ofborg ofborg bot added 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 101-500 labels Feb 12, 2021
@hmenke
Copy link
Member Author

hmenke commented Feb 12, 2021

/marvin opt-in
/status needs_reviewer

@marvin-mk2
Copy link

marvin-mk2 bot commented Feb 12, 2021

Hi! I'm an experimental bot. My goal is to guide this PR through its stages, hopefully ending with a merge. You can read up on the usage here.

@marvin-mk2 marvin-mk2 bot added marvin This PR was reviewed by Marvin, a discontinued bot: https://github.com/timokau/marvin-mk2 needs_reviewer (old Marvin label, do not use) labels Feb 12, 2021
@hmenke hmenke marked this pull request as ready for review February 12, 2021 15:37
@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

@jonringer I'm using kernelAtLeast and kernelOlder now to mark ZFS broken on unsupported kernels (supported are 3.10 to 5.10). What do you think?

LGTM

@marvin-mk2 marvin-mk2 bot added awaiting_reviewer (old Marvin label, do not use) and removed needs_reviewer (old Marvin label, do not use) labels Feb 12, 2021
@wizeman
Copy link
Member

wizeman commented Feb 14, 2021

I can't easily tell if the kernel compatibility changes are correct, but we should merge 2.0.3 ASAP because 2.0.2 has a serious data corruption issue: openzfs/zfs#11474 openzfs/zfs#11576

@hmenke
Copy link
Member Author

hmenke commented Feb 14, 2021

In that case we also need a backport.

@hmenke hmenke added the 9.needs: port to stable A PR needs a backport to the stable release. label Feb 14, 2021
@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

tests passed

@jonringer jonringer merged commit 3f0e6e1 into NixOS:master Feb 15, 2021
@TredwellGit TredwellGit added 8.has: port to stable A PR already has a backport to the stable release. and removed 9.needs: port to stable A PR needs a backport to the stable release. labels Jul 27, 2021
@nixos-discourse
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/package-zfs-kernel-2-0-5-5-14-5-is-marked-as-broken-refusing-to-evaluate/15139/5

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jcumming jcumming Awaiting requested review from jcumming

@jonringer jonringer Awaiting requested review from jonringer

@wizeman wizeman Awaiting requested review from wizeman

@fpletz fpletz Awaiting requested review from fpletz

@globin globin Awaiting requested review from globin

@Mic92 Mic92 Awaiting requested review from Mic92

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
8.has: port to stable A PR already has a backport to the stable release. 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 101-500 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by the maintainer of the package it changes awaiting_reviewer (old Marvin label, do not use) marvin This PR was reviewed by Marvin, a discontinued bot: https://github.com/timokau/marvin-mk2
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@hmenke @jonringer @wizeman @nixos-discourse @TredwellGit