anyone compile and install ZFS manually?

[Phil Marsh]

Hi Sean,
I'm going to keep running the manually-installed ZFS 2.2.2. on my
non-critical machines. It appears to be working OK for running on of my
backup arrays and it went through a kernel update automatically without any
issues. I'll give it until early Jan and if Ubuntu 22.04 doesn't have the
2.1.14 out by then, I'm going to upgrade to 2.1.14 on my production server.
I also keep backups of the original OS without the ZFS update so I could
roll back if I had to. I will not update the pools so as to allow eventual
merging with the future Ubuntu repositories.
Thanks and best,
Phil

On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 8:42 PM Sean Reifschneider <jafo00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I also generally avoid non-LTS, but in the case of needing a ZFS 2.2.0 and
> manually building it, I also generally avoid that.  So, it just becomes a
> question of which one I want to avoid more.  :-)
>
> If I'm understanding your "why Ubuntu is so slow to upgrade ZFS", do you
> mean "why Ubuntu 22.04 doesn't have ZFS 2.2.0"?  I mean, that's part of
> what you get from LTS: they don't chase the latest updates, they support
> the packages available at release time.  This helps reduce the issues of
> applications you are running on the system breaking because things have
> changed underneath them in incompatible ways.
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 3:44 PM Phil Marsh <microcraftx at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sean,
>> Thanks for your input.
>> Yes, but I generally avoid the non-LTS versions of Ubuntu. Not sure if
>> this is necessary or not as I generally upgrade via a fresh install. Maybe
>> that's dumb.
>> Also, I back up my OS and can revert to an earlier OS - i.e. prior to the
>> ZFS upgrade.
>> I'm going to try to uninstall and roll back to the original ZFS 2.1.5 on
>> my Ubuntu test machine from ZFS 2.2.2. I did not upgrade the pools. Perhaps
>> I'll wind up with a good original ZFS 2.1.5 by doing this so I can then
>> feel confident that if ZFS 2.2.2 doesn't work like I want, I can always go
>> back?
>> I will avoid upgrading my pools maybe until we get LTS 23.04 available.
>> Unfortunately, the 24.04 uses ZFS 2.2.0 which has its own bug. I'm left
>> wondering why Ubuntu is so slow to upgrade ZFS? I'm thinking it's more a
>> lack of people power than trying to avoid unproven new software and that's
>> understandable.
>> Thanks,
>> Phil
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 2:42 PM Sean Reifschneider <jafo00 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> FYI: Ubuntu 23.10 has zfs 2.2.0rc3 in it and the branch that they are
>>> working toward for 24.04 has 2.2.2.  Personally, I'd probably be looking at
>>> running 23.10 with an upgrade to 24.04 when it's available for something
>>> production if I needed a newer ZFS for anything production, than rolling a
>>> "make install".  Just throwing out that option.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 1:39 PM Phil Marsh <microcraftx at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Stephen, all,
>>>> It appears that the OpenZFS compile from source worked on my Ubuntu
>>>> 22.04 for ZFS 2.2.2 and it still works after the recent kernel update. My
>>>> package manager is reporting ZFS 2.2.2-1 and zfs-dkms 2.2.2-1 installed.
>>>> There is no zsys, zfsutils-linux nor zfs-initramfs installed, but I'm not
>>>> going to be running ZFS on root anyway. Might look into a BTRFS mirror for
>>>> root instead.
>>>> Yes, I know that the maintainers of Ubuntu 22.04 have an upgrade to
>>>> 2.1.14 on their schedule, but who knows how long that could take? I'm a bit
>>>> paranoid about getting data trashed, even though I know this is an old bug.
>>>> If it can fail, it usually fails on my watch. I'm going to try this again
>>>> from the top on another system.
>>>> I'll keep you posted on my adventures in ZFS.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Phil
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 2:00 AM Phil Marsh <microcraftx at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>>> I probably could run the "make install" ZFS version in a chroot if I
>>>>> really wanted badly to use ZFS 2.1.14 prior to Ubuntu including it in their
>>>>> updates?
>>>>> That way, the installation wouldn't mess up the OS. But then, I bet
>>>>> you'd have to bind the mount directory in the chroot. Sounds like more
>>>>> trouble than it's worth.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Phil
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:02 PM Stephen Warren <
>>>>> swarren-tag-list-nclug at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/7/23 15:23, Phil Marsh wrote:
>>>>>> > Also another question.
>>>>>> > The method I proposed to build and install ZFS 2.2.2 in my previous
>>>>>> > email apparently leaves out the following: at least I don't see
>>>>>> them in
>>>>>> > the installed packages in synaptic.
>>>>>> > zfs-dkms
>>>>>> > zfs-initramfs
>>>>>> > zfs-zed
>>>>>> > zfsutils-linux
>>>>>> > Perhaps those are installed, sidestepping apt package manager, via
>>>>>> > sudo make install; sudo 1dconfig; sudo demod
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would personally avoid running "make install" as root for any SW on
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> system that has an OS-supplied package manager. If you do so, then
>>>>>> want
>>>>>> to remove the installed files, or install an OS package that contains
>>>>>> those files, e.g. if Ubuntu updates their ZFS, or you find a PPA that
>>>>>> supplies the version you need, you will be unhappy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.nclug.org/pipermail/nclug/attachments/20231211/4613f2f2/attachment.htm>