DAOS-18596 common: use libpmemobj1-devel on Leap

[grom72]

Use libpmemobj1-devel to build Leap RPMs instead of outdated libpmemobj-devel.

Remove distribution suffix as it is irrelevant

Update dependency to PMDK version 2.1.2-1 as it is the latest stable version used for master validation.

Signed-off-by: Tomasz Gromadzki tomasz.gromadzki@hpe.com

Steps for the author:

• Commit message follows the guidelines.
• Appropriate Features or Test-tag pragmas were used.
• Appropriate Functional Test Stages were run.
• At least two positive code reviews including at least one code owner from each category referenced in the PR.
• Testing is complete. If necessary, forced-landing label added and a reason added in a comment.

After all prior steps are complete:

• Gatekeeper requested (daos-gatekeeper added as a reviewer).

[github-actions]

Ticket title is 'Release 2.6 uses libpmemobj-devel library instead of libpmemobj1-devel on Leap15 to build daos-server rpm'
Status is 'Open'
Labels: 'PMDK'
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-18596

[mchaarawi]

i do not understand why this change is needed in daos. why is pmdk doing this in the first place?

this is also upgrading the version of pmdk being used?

[mchaarawi]

i do not understand why this change is needed in daos. why is pmdk doing this in the first place?

this is also upgrading the version of pmdk being used?

to clarify, im not requesting changes for your naming thing, just trying to understand why this naming discrepancy exists between distros.

But we cannot land a dependency upgrade without requiring merge approval. the released version of pmdk is 2.1.0-6. @daltonbohning already commented on your other PR that you need merge approval on the pmdk upgrade. so please work with your manager to get that settled first.

[grom72]

i do not understand why this change is needed in daos. why is pmdk doing this in the first place?
this is also upgrading the version of pmdk being used?

to clarify, im not requesting changes for your naming thing, just trying to understand why this naming discrepancy exists between distros.

But we cannot land a dependency upgrade without requiring merge approval. the released version of pmdk is 2.1.0-6. @daltonbohning already commented on your other PR that you need merge approval on the pmdk upgrade. so please work with your manager to get that settled first.

@mchaarawi you are right, the problem is in different place I'm closing this ticket and related backport:
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-18601
I've created another (separate) ticket to pin PMDK version on 2.6 to enable further PMDK work in a way that will not affect 2.6
https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-18602
#17567

[mchaarawi]

i do not understand why this change is needed in daos. why is pmdk doing this in the first place?
this is also upgrading the version of pmdk being used?

to clarify, im not requesting changes for your naming thing, just trying to understand why this naming discrepancy exists between distros.
But we cannot land a dependency upgrade without requiring merge approval. the released version of pmdk is 2.1.0-6. @daltonbohning already commented on your other PR that you need merge approval on the pmdk upgrade. so please work with your manager to get that settled first.

@mchaarawi you are right, the problem is in different place I'm closing this ticket and related backport: https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-18601 I've created another (separate) ticket to pin PMDK version on 2.6 to enable further PMDK work in a way that will not affect 2.6 https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-18602 #17567

i think you are missing the point. we are not blocking upgrades to pmdk to use a later version in 2.6. If you think it is important and fixes things, we do want to upgrade. but you have to go through merge approval. it's a worse route IMO to pin 2.6 to use an older version just to avoid getting merge approval.
In any case, given where master is (current 2.8 branch) and how close we are to rc of 2.8, we do need to review the upgrade in RMG meeting anyway. @ryon-jensen mentioned he will invite you to RMG to discuss the changes and risk to both 2.8 and 2.6.