|
openSUSE Build Service Pumps Out Red Hat, CentOS Packages
Published: January 29, 2008
by Timothy Prickett Morgan
The openSUSE community that is backed by commercial Linux distributor Novell and that has created an open, publicly available build service as the backbone of the openSUSE development version of SUSE Linux announced last week that it can now package open source programs with two competitive Linuxes. With the ability to package applications for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and their clones from alternative RHEL supplier, CentOS, the openSUSE Build Service is that much more useful.
When Novell moved to an open development model for its open source implementation of Linux, called SUSE Linux Enterprise Server on the server and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop on the laptop and desktop, the company did more than open up the development of the code to some outside techies and give them some passwords to access a versioning system. The company went the extra mile and created the openSUSE Build Service, which was a means to not only pick Linux and application source code and slap them together into a compiled package for various types of iron. From the get-go, Novell wanted the openSUSE Build Service to be applicable to other Linuxes and supporting different packaging methods. As such, the build service supported the openSUSE and SUSE Linux distributions of Novell's Linux as well as packaging up applications for Ubuntu and Debian Linuxes as well.
SUSE Linux and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (and its Fedora development releases) adhere to the Red Hat Package Manager (RPM) format as the installation wrapper around applications, while the Debian variants of Linux, including Ubuntu, use the Deb file format. Novell has adopted RPM for its NetWare 6.5 operating system, and IBM's AIX Unix variant can also handle RPM formats for open source applications. With Red Hat Linuxes already supporting the RPM format, having the openSUSE Build Service support the packaging of RPMs for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 and 5, as it does as of last week, is not that big of a deal from a technical angle. Ditto for CentOS 4 and 5, which are the de-Red Hatted variants of RHEL 4 and 5 that are offered as an alternative to RHEL with much lower-priced tech support than Red Hat offers.
The fact that the openSUSE Build Service can spit out packages for RHEL and CentOS Linuxes does, however, make a big difference for companies creating their own Linux application stacks, especially independent software vendors and open source project managers who want to get their code on specific Linuxes in the easiest way possible.
Interestingly, the Build Service could be used to build other variants of Linux, according to Holger Dyroff, vice president of SUSE Linux product management at Novell. But thus far, no one has asked for it.
As for the supporting of other operating systems and packaging methods for applications, Dyroff says that Novell and the openSUSE project are keeping an open mind, but are only going to do the things that the community asks for and supports the development of. "We will follow developer demand," Dyroff explains. "It's not our goal to provide support for every Linux distribution on the planet, but it is also not our goal to exclude any Linux, either."
It would, of course, be very interesting if the openSUSE Build Service could do Solaris from Sun Microsystems, HP-UX from Hewlett-Packard, Mac OS X from Apple Computer, and Windows from Microsoft--especially Windows. But the most popular program for packaging Windows applications, InstallShield, is a closed source program, and Dyroff busted up laughing when I suggested that it was perfectly legal to do a clean, black box implementation of a program that worked exactly like InstallShield and then add Windows support for open source applications as part of the build service.
To date, there are close to 3,897 packagers who are using the openSUSE Build Service, and they have created more than 33,000 packages based on over 1,800 open source application projects that are in the openSUSE repository. In the last ten months, the openSUSE project has seen 1.6 million downloads of the openSUSE 10.2 and 10.3 releases as well. This is a large number of people that are putting the development releases for SUSE Linux through the paces.
RELATED STORIES
Novell Delivers openSUSE 10.3 Linux Development Release
OpenSUSE Turns Two, Novell Celebrates with 10.3 Beta
The openSUSE Project Ships 10.2 Release
Novell's openSUSE Effort Gains Steam
Novell Launches Public Build System, Previews SUSE 10.1
Novell to Set SUSE Linux 10.0 Loose in October
Novell Opens Up Development for SUSE Linux
Post this story to del.icio.us
Post this story to Digg
Post this story to Slashdot
|
|
Why File-based System Backup is your Best Bet
File-based, Full System Backups Create Advantages Over Image-based Backups
File-based backups used for system recovery have been around for years. And, until recently, file-based meant a long, painstaking, manual process capable of turning off even the most meticulous system administrator. Image-based backups, then, seemed to solve this problem by eliminating the need to deal with recreating partitions, filesystems, volume groups or other details related to the system's storage configuration. In an image-based restore, the storage configuration and data from the original system are restored as a whole to the new system. While this method produced fast recovery times, Linux administrators began to realize disk image backup was more of an alternative method with its own set of problems and limitations than an answer to the challenges of manual, file-based backup.
Limitations to Disk Image Backup
Since disk image backups make no distinction between files and instead backup the hard drive as a group of sectors, bare-metal recovery can be quick and easy by simply rewriting a duplicate image onto a new, identical disk drive. A fine solution, as long as the old system and new system are indeed identical in types, sizes, locations- basically the exact same hardware. Any differences in hardware, however, could render an image backup unusable.
Many system administrators know first-hand the frustration caused by the inflexibility of image-based backup. "What I hear time and time again from clients is that they switched from image-based backup to file-based because of the limitations they encountered when trying to restore a backup onto different hardware." said Manuel Altamirano, Storix Software Director of Sales and Marketing. "Administrators assume they will have access to identical hardware after a disaster or for migration when the time comes. Unfortunately, so often this is not the case. Companies are left with unplanned, excessive downtime."
Even more advanced disk image backup products, that offer alterations to disk partition tables, still fail to understand more advanced and increasingly common storage configuration tools such as the Logical Volume Manager (LVM) or Software RAID (meta-disks) that also must be altered to match new hard disk configuration before data can be restored. In these cases, users must manually alter and build the configuration, usually through command-line utilities and manual editing of configuration files. This also requires users to have knowledge on how to make a system bootable. Rebuilding a system using a disk image backup requires experienced Linux administrators and could take days, weeks or longer resulting in crippling downtime for an organization.
Advances in File-based Backup
File-based backup tools today can automate the process of recording every aspect of a system separately such as disk, filesystem and boot loader configuration while supporting all popular Linux storage configuration tools (i.e. LVM and Software RAID). This detailed backup information is used to greatly simplify the recovery of a failed system from scratch, even if hardware differences are detected on the new system. Furthermore, systems rebuilt from the ground up using file-based backups often times operate better than the original because there is virtually no fragmentation when the restore is completed.
Flexible recovery based on file-based backup
File-based backup products have the ability to reconfigure disks, partitions, filesystems and other storage solutions to fit onto new hardware. This ability to adapt a backup to fit new hardware or alter the system's storage configuration is called "Adaptable System Recovery" or ASR. Only backup solutions that gather details about the original system have enough information and flexibility to make the ASR process of altering configuration so simple even novice Linux administrators can quickly perform the recovery. Once new configuration is completed, data files from the backup are easily restored onto the new hardware. Finally, the system is made bootable based on the new hardware.
The revolutionary adaptability of ASR found in file-based backup tools creates further added value for system administrators because these products can now be used for far more than just reactive tasks such as disaster recovery.
Applications for ASR:
Reactive
- Disaster Recovery- restore systems in minutes after a crash, even if hardware is not the same as the original
Proactive
- Provisioning/cloning- a single backup "golden image" can be used to provision different systems, even if disks, adapters or other elements are not the same.
- Storage software migration- change configuration on the same system for improved performance and availability
- Hardware migration- install the same system onto newer or virtual systems
New system backup management features
Products using file-based system backup have not neglected to consider a system administrator's daily backup responsibilities. These products now incorporate functionality for backup management as well as some of the most advanced features seen in backup and recovery solutions for Linux and AIX. Some advanced features designed to simplify daily backup management for system administrators include:
- Graphical, Web and Command line interfaces
- Local and remote backups to disk or tape devices
- Sequential and random tape autoloader support
- Support for SAN storage solutions
- Tivoli Storage Manager integration
- Oracle database backup support
- Backup data encryption
- Multiple compression levels
File-based Backup Solutions Provide Most Bang for the Buck
Inexpensive products exist that combine both file-based backup management and ASR in one program. Look for a file-based system backup product with advanced features like those mentioned above. In turn, regular backup responsibilities such as automatically verifying backups and encrypting backup data will become much easier. Additionally, combined ASR capabilities greatly reduce downtime and required expertise for both reactive (even bare metal) and proactive recovery projects. File-based system backup and recovery solutions are an economical and more comprehensive option than their image-based counterparts.
About the Author
Anne Stobaugh is an independent contractor working with Storix Software to educate Linux and AIX users on the advantages of file-based backup and recovery solutions.
www.storix.com
www.stobaughmarketing.com
|
Editor: Timothy Prickett Morgan
Contributing Editors: Dan Burger, Joe Hertvik, Kevin Vandever,
Shannon O'Donnell, Victor Rozek, Hesh Wiener, Alex Woodie
Publisher and Advertising Director: Jenny Thomas
Advertising Sales Representative: Kim Reed
|
IT Jungle Store Top Book Picks
Getting Started with PHP for i5/OS: List Price, $59.95
The System i RPG & RPG IV Tutorial and Lab Exercises: List Price, $59.95
The System i Pocket RPG & RPG IV Guide: List Price, $69.95
The iSeries Pocket Database Guide: List Price, $59.00
The iSeries Pocket Developers' Guide: List Price, $59.00
The iSeries Pocket SQL Guide: List Price, $59.00
The iSeries Pocket Query Guide: List Price, $49.00
The iSeries Pocket WebFacing Primer: List Price, $39.00
Migrating to WebSphere Express for iSeries: List Price, $49.00
iSeries Express Web Implementer's Guide: List Price, $59.00
Getting Started with WebSphere Development Studio for iSeries: List Price, $79.95
Getting Started With WebSphere Development Studio Client for iSeries: List Price, $89.00
Getting Started with WebSphere Express for iSeries: List Price, $49.00
WebFacing Application Design and Development Guide: List Price, $55.00
Can the AS/400 Survive IBM?: List Price, $49.00
The All-Everything Machine: List Price, $29.95
Chip Wars: List Price, $29.95
|
|
January 19, 2008: Volume 10, Number 3
January 12, 2008: Volume 10, Number 2
January 5, 2008: Volume 10, Number 1
December 29, 2007: Volume 9, Number 52
December 22, 2007: Volume 9, Number 51
December 15, 2007: Volume 9, Number 50
|
|
|
|