RPM Distributions delayed again?

Here’s the updated status:

We are still reviewing the below PR’s and making changes based on the review comments,

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1807
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/issues/1545

Merged the below PR’s

We fixed issues to have the Centos7 OpenSearch Dashboards runner to correctly export fpm and also to allow dynamic node version switch

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1888

Add dashboards rpm assemble support in opensearch-build repo
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1852

We are still actively working on automating validation and planning to complete it this week. There were additional scope added for OpenSearch Dashboards validation that is delaying the completion of this work
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/issues/1555

Next up
• Build, assemble and publish both X64 and ARM 64 RPM artifacts to artifacts storage bucket.
• Create a new Yum repo to support RPM installation
• Add Yum repo creation process to OpenSearch distribution workflow
• Sign the metadata file for Yum repo and RPM package

3 Likes

Good news. We have finally merged a critical PR to support building different distribution types

PR’s merged:

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1807

We have also opened a PR to automate RPM validation and its currently under review

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1912

Blockers

We found a new issue blocking the RPM build generation and working on resolve it now.

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/issues/1545#issuecomment-1092408321

Next up

• Merge the automated validation PR and resolve blockers

• Build, assemble and publish both X64 and ARM 64 RPM artifacts to artifacts storage bucket.

• Create a new Yum repo to support RPM installation

• Add Yum repo creation process to OpenSearch distribution workflow

• Sign the metadata file for Yum repo and RPM package

2 Likes

Hey;

We’ve hit an issue with the RPM build, and we need to make a decision on whether we want to do some build-fu to get out 1.3.1 in mid-April, or if we want to skip 1.3.1 and go straight to 1.3.2 at the beginning of May.

https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/issues/1545

Details are in the issue, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks,
/C

1 Like

I posted a comment in GH. Earlier comments indicated considerable uncertainty as to when the feature may be ready. GH seems to indicate there may be some clearer data now. Have you found the shift in additional resources assigned to the feature have helped bring the feature to reality? Can you give any updates on plans for the release of this feature?

1 Like

Thanks for your comments on the issue. Looking at the amount of hackery we’d have to do/churn on getting the release, we’ll aim to get 2.0-rc1 out first, then release 1.3.2 and all future release on RPM.

Thanks,
/C

We are very close to adding the RPM support for OpenSearch 2.0-rc1 version.

Find below the current status

We are reviewing the PR to add the distribution validation for RPM
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/1912

We created a new PR to perform integration tests for RPM artifacts and its currently under review
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/pull/2000

We will be starting to generate the RPM release candidate artifacts once the above 2 PR’s are merged.

We will keep this thread updated with the progress.

1 Like

Hello all, RPM artifacts are ready to be released with 2.0 RC1 version. We have closed all the necessary PR’s and currently working on closing the (below) last minute issue discovered during our final testing.
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-build/issues/2043

We have finalized the solution for the above issue and we will close it soon. I will keep this thread updated with the progress.

2 Likes

thank you @bbarani for keeping the community up to date on this!

Thanks @bbarani for the update . Any ETA for the RPM release date ?

if tried with local build on 2.0 RC1 version in MAC and got stuck with some errors and had to create Opensearch RPM build failing on Mac
for help.

Have you seen this error and if yes how did you fix it .

Thanks in advance !

Hi @dinesh It looks like the errors are due to the fact that you are compiling the distribution on macOS operating system and “LDCONFIG” command doesn’t exist on macOS. This issue should be resolved when compiling on linux. Having said that, our current plan is to release RPM artifacts for 2.0-rc1 build on May 03 2022.

@zhujiaxi has also provided a workaround solution if you need the RPM sooner here

1 Like

Thats a great news @bbarani . Waiting for the official RPM release.
Manual build is a troublesome due to lots of interdependent platform utilities etc.

Great news! We have released official version of 2.0-rc1 release today that includes RPM artifacts as well. You can download the RPM artifacts from Opensearch 2.2.1 · OpenSearch

We are targeting to publish the RPM artifacts for 1.x series from 1.3.2 release scheduled for May 05 2022. We will keep you updated on the progress.

@dinesh you can download the official RPM artifacts now.

3 Likes

Awesome @bbarani
Thank you .

I will get back if I face any difficulty installing the same.

@bbarani i tried installing in standalone mode and it is working as expected:
curl -XGET https://localhost:9200 -u ‘admin:admin’ --insecure
{
“name” : “opensearch_poc”,
“cluster_name” : “opensearch”,
“cluster_uuid” : “RliApZQ7SQejQMLvd8SE-g”,
“version” : {
“distribution” : “opensearch”,
“number” : “2.0.0-rc1”,
“build_type” : “rpm”,
“build_hash” : “96802e5699e1eed71ffd5ad5b626adc0d0590f1a”,
“build_date” : “2022-04-29T19:55:32.972938565Z”,
“build_snapshot” : false,
“lucene_version” : “9.1.0”,
“minimum_wire_compatibility_version” : “7.10.0”,
“minimum_index_compatibility_version” : “7.0.0”
},
“tagline” : “The OpenSearch Project: https://opensearch.org/
}

i have few queries though:

  1. As version [2.0.0-rc1] is a pre-release version of OpenSearch and is not suitable for production, shall i do further testing on this version or opt for the stable prod version 1.3.2 ?
  2. Any tentative timeline for prod version release for 2.0.0 ?
  3. Does it make sense to change the .opendistro_security index name to opensearch_security , is it something you already have in pipeline?

Thanks again for your support!

We are planning to release the GA version for 2.0 on May 24th 2022. You can view the version roadmap here. You can still test the RC1 version and provide your feedback but its not intended for production.

@davelago Do you have any updates on changing .opendistro_security index name to opensearch_security?

The decision is not to rename indices: Renaming, and Backwards Compatibility for Indices · Issue #17 · opensearch-project/opensearch-plugins · GitHub

We have released OpenSearch 1.3.2 version today with RPM artifacts. You can download it using Opensearch 1.3.2 · OpenSearch. Let us know if you have any other questions.

@justme @spapadop @oscark Please feel free to test the RPM distribution when you get some time and provide your feedback.

1 Like

I was able to download, but not install since the packages are not signed. This appears to be expected near as I can tell from the RPM status in issue #27. I also know this is an old question, but one I didn’t see ever get answered: Do we know which yum/dnf repo will be distributing the RPMs?

warning: Downloads/opensearch-1.3.2-linux-x64.rpm: Header V4 RSA/SHA512 Signature, key ID 9310d3fc: NOKEY
Verifying… ################################# [100%]
Preparing… ################################# [100%]
package opensearch-1.3.2-1.x86_64 does not verify: no digest

Actually, I just noticed that #27 is closed despite only 12 of 22 tasks are complete. Why was this closed if it isn’t complete?

@justme, we closed the issue as the changes have been completed (and merged) but I realized that some of the individual tasks were just not checked. The open tasks are more related to automation and should not affect the artifacts itself. We are working on automation as a part of enhancement exercise and will be tracked separately. As far as I know, we did sign the yum repo as well as the rpm artifact but I will double check with my development team and confirm soon. You can view the RPM documentation here