Mailing List Archive: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release

Jun 6, 2011, 10:56 AM

Post #1 of 12 (3532 views)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi everybody,

The current resource agent repository [1] has been tagged to v3.9.1rc1.
Tarballs are also available [2].

This is the very first release of the common resource agent repository.
It is a big milestone towards eliminating duplication of effort with the
goal of improving the overall quality and user experience. There is
still a long way to go but the first stone has been laid down.

Highlights for the LHA resource agents set:

- - lxc, symlink: new resource agents
- - db2: major rewrite and support for master/slave mode of operation
- - exportfs: backup/restore of rmtab is back
- - mysql: multiple improvements for master/slave and replication
- - ocft: new tests for pgsql, postfix, and iscsi

Highlights for the rgmanager resource agents set:

- - oracledb: use shutdown immediate
- - tomcat5: fix generated XML
- - nfsclient: fix client name mismatch
- - halvm: fix mirror dev failure
- - nfs: fix selinux integration

Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
configuration time, which will also set the default for the
spec file.

The full list of changes is available in the "ChangeLog" file for users,
and in an auto-generated git-to-changelog file called "ChangeLog.devel".

NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This
version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at
3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package
upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both
projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it.

The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon.

Many thanks to everybody who helped with this release, in
particular to the numerous contributors. Without you, the release
would certainly not be possible.

Cheers,
The RAS Tribe

[1] https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/tarball/v3.9.1rc1
[2] https://fedorahosted.org/releases/r/e/resource-agents/

PS: I am absolutely sure that URL [2] might give some people a fit, but
we are still working to get a common release area.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=2KKW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

keisuke.mori+ha at gmail

Jun 8, 2011, 1:16 AM

Post #2 of 12 (3485 views)

Permalink

Hi,

Thank you for all your efforts for the new release.

2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
> accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
> configuration time, which will also set the default for the
> spec file.

Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
resource-agents-1.0.4
so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.

We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and
if it was missing
we can not upgrade them anymore.

from resource-agents.spec.in :
---- --- --- --- ---- --- --- --- ---- --- --- ---
%if %{with linuxha}
%if 0%{?rhel} == 0
%package -n ldirectord
---- --- --- --- ---- --- --- --- ---- --- --- ---

> NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This
> version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at
> 3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package
> upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both
> projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it.
>
> The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon.

BTW why not 4.0? :)
just curious though.

Regards,
--
Keisuke MORI

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 8, 2011, 1:50 AM

Post #3 of 12 (3485 views)

Permalink

Hi,

On 6/8/2011 10:16 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for all your efforts for the new release.
>
>
> 2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
>> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
>> accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
>> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
>> configuration time, which will also set the default for the
>> spec file.
>
> Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
> I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
> resource-agents-1.0.4
> so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.

Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).

Florian, last time we spoke, we were trying to avoid adding BR on
packages that are not part of RHEL, but then to build linux-ha agents we
need cluster-glue* that are not part of RHEL anyway.

We should be consistent here.

I am ok to allow people to build ldirectord.

>
> We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and
> if it was missing
> we can not upgrade them anymore.

Understood, we are still smoothing a few corners after the merge. It?s
good people are spotting those bits.

>
>
>> NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This
>> version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at
>> 3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package
>> upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both
>> projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it.
>>
>> The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon.
>
> BTW why not 4.0? :)
> just curious though.

There is really nothing major in this release vs 1.0.4 for linux-ha and
3.1.x for rgmanager agents, other than co-exist in the same tree.

We will probably use 4.0 to introduce the new OCF standard and the new
common clusterlabs/ provider and mark effectively the introduction of
new features.

Fabio

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

dejan at suse

Jun 8, 2011, 2:06 AM

Post #4 of 12 (3485 views)

Permalink

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 10:50:17AM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 6/8/2011 10:16 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thank you for all your efforts for the new release.
> >
> >
> > 2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
> >> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
> >> accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
> >> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
> >> configuration time, which will also set the default for the
> >> spec file.
> >
> > Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
> > I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
> > resource-agents-1.0.4
> > so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.
>
> Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
> on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).
>
> Florian, last time we spoke, we were trying to avoid adding BR on
> packages that are not part of RHEL, but then to build linux-ha agents we
> need cluster-glue* that are not part of RHEL anyway.
>
> We should be consistent here.
>
> I am ok to allow people to build ldirectord.
>
> >
> > We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and
> > if it was missing
> > we can not upgrade them anymore.
>
> Understood, we are still smoothing a few corners after the merge. It?s
> good people are spotting those bits.
>
> >
> >
> >> NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This
> >> version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at
> >> 3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package
> >> upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both
> >> projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it.
> >>
> >> The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon.
> >
> > BTW why not 4.0? :)
> > just curious though.
>
> There is really nothing major in this release vs 1.0.4 for linux-ha and
> 3.1.x for rgmanager agents, other than co-exist in the same tree.

Actually, while looking at it, I'd also like something else
rather than 3.9.x. Can't put my finger on what's exactly the
issue, but something like 4.0 would somehow look better. Is it
only me?

> We will probably use 4.0 to introduce the new OCF standard and the new
> common clusterlabs/ provider and mark effectively the introduction of
> new features.

4.1?

Cheers,

Dejan

> Fabio
> _______________________________________________
> ha-wg-technical mailing list
> ha-wg-technical at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 8, 2011, 2:14 AM

Post #5 of 12 (3483 views)

Permalink

On 6/8/2011 11:06 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:

>>>> NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This
>>>> version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at
>>>> 3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package
>>>> upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both
>>>> projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it.
>>>>
>>>> The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon.
>>>
>>> BTW why not 4.0? :)
>>> just curious though.
>>
>> There is really nothing major in this release vs 1.0.4 for linux-ha and
>> 3.1.x for rgmanager agents, other than co-exist in the same tree.
>
> Actually, while looking at it, I'd also like something else
> rather than 3.9.x. Can't put my finger on what's exactly the
> issue, but something like 4.0 would somehow look better. Is it
> only me?

I don?t have a strong opinion at all. It?s just a number.
If people want 4.0, we can make 3.9.1 final into 4.0.

>
>> We will probably use 4.0 to introduce the new OCF standard and the new
>> common clusterlabs/ provider and mark effectively the introduction of
>> new features.
>
> 4.1?

or 5.0.. or year.month.day ;).. really anything the community wants is
ok with me as long as it doesn?t break rolling upgrades.

Fabio

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

keisuke.mori+ha at gmail

Jun 8, 2011, 3:22 AM

Post #6 of 12 (3483 views)

Permalink

Hi,

2011/6/8 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
> Hi,
>
> On 6/8/2011 10:16 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thank you for all your efforts for the new release.
>>
>>
>> 2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
>>> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
>>> accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
>>> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
>>> configuration time, which will also set the default for the
>>> spec file.
>>
>> Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
>> I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
>> resource-agents-1.0.4
>> so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.
>
> Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
> on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).

ldirectord requires no extra packages to build on RHEL. It just a perl script.
You may be concerned about the running environment; it requires perl-MailTools
at least which can be obtained only from EPEL or CentOS extras, but
ldirectord users
have been already doing to collect such packages when they want to use it.

I can provide a patch to the spec file if it's ok to build.

Note that the (linux-ha) resource-agents should have been completely independent
from libnet as of 1.0.4. Before that IPv6addr RA was the only
dependency of libnet.

Thanks,

>
> Florian, last time we spoke, we were trying to avoid adding BR on
> packages that are not part of RHEL, but then to build linux-ha agents we
> need cluster-glue* that are not part of RHEL anyway.
>
> We should be consistent here.
>
> I am ok to allow people to build ldirectord.
>
>>
>> We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and
>> if it was missing
>> we can not upgrade them anymore.
>
> Understood, we are still smoothing a few corners after the merge. It?s
> good people are spotting those bits.
>

--
Keisuke MORI

resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 8, 2011, 3:24 AM

Post #7 of 12 (3486 views)

Permalink

On 6/8/2011 12:22 PM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2011/6/8 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 6/8/2011 10:16 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thank you for all your efforts for the new release.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>:
>>>> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to
>>>> accommodate both projects? needs. The most noticeable change is the
>>>> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at
>>>> configuration time, which will also set the default for the
>>>> spec file.
>>>
>>> Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
>>> I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
>>> resource-agents-1.0.4
>>> so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.
>>
>> Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
>> on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).
>
> ldirectord requires no extra packages to build on RHEL. It just a perl script.
> You may be concerned about the running environment; it requires perl-MailTools
> at least which can be obtained only from EPEL or CentOS extras, but
> ldirectord users
> have been already doing to collect such packages when they want to use it.
>
> I can provide a patch to the spec file if it's ok to build.
>
> Note that the (linux-ha) resource-agents should have been completely independent
> from libnet as of 1.0.4. Before that IPv6addr RA was the only
> dependency of libnet.
>
> Thanks,
>
>>
>> Florian, last time we spoke, we were trying to avoid adding BR on
>> packages that are not part of RHEL, but then to build linux-ha agents we
>> need cluster-glue* that are not part of RHEL anyway.
>>
>> We should be consistent here.
>>
>> I am ok to allow people to build ldirectord.
>>
>>>
>>> We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and
>>> if it was missing
>>> we can not upgrade them anymore.
>>
>> Understood, we are still smoothing a few corners after the merge. It?s
>> good people are spotting those bits.
>>

Whops.. yes you are absolutely right. I got confused between the IPAddr
and ldirectord.

Yes you can either send me a patch, or I can do it. It?s really piece of
cake.

Thanks a lot for your help!

Fabio

Re: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

keisuke.mori+ha at gmail

Jun 8, 2011, 10:07 PM

Post #8 of 12 (3471 views)

Permalink

Hi,

2011/6/8 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto@redhat.com>:
>>>> Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
>>>> I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
>>>> resource-agents-1.0.4
>>>> so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.
>>>
>>> Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
>>> on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).
>>
>> ldirectord requires no extra packages to build on RHEL. It just a perl script.
>> You may be concerned about the running environment; it requires perl-MailTools
>> at least which can be obtained only from EPEL or CentOS extras, but
>> ldirectord users
>> have been already doing to collect such packages when they want to use it.
>>
>> I can provide a patch to the spec file if it's ok to build.
>>
>> Note that the (linux-ha) resource-agents should have been completely independent
>> from libnet as of 1.0.4. Before that IPv6addr RA was the only
>> dependency of libnet.

> Whops.. yes you are absolutely right. I got confused between the IPAddr
> and ldirectord.
>
> Yes you can either send me a patch, or I can do it. It´s really piece of
> cake.

Ok, I would suggest the attached patch for resolving this particular issue,
but I think there are still some issues left;

1) I'm wondering why this condition is needed; I think we can always use
%{_var}/run/resource-agents in the current version.
----
%if 0%{?fedora} >= 11 || 0%{?centos_version} > 5 || 0%{?rhel} > 5
%dir %{_var}/run/heartbeat/rsctmp
%else
%dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents
%endif
----

2) duplicated man8/ldirectord.8.gz is included both in resource-agents
and ldirectord packages. it should not be a big problem though.
----
%{_mandir}/man8/*.8*
(...)
%{_mandir}/man8/ldirectord.8*
----

3) It can not build on RHEL5 with this error. I'd be glad if there is
some kind of backward compatibility.
----
%if 0%{?suse_version} == 0 && 0%{?fedora} == 0 && 0%{?centos_version}
== 0 && 0%{?rhel} == 0
%{error:Unable to determine the distribution/version. This is
generally caused by missing /etc/rpm/macros.dist. Please install the
correct build packages or define the required macros manually.}
----

Regards,
--
Keisuke MORI

Re: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 9, 2011, 12:40 AM

Post #9 of 12 (3502 views)

Permalink

Hi,

On 6/9/2011 7:07 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:

>
>> Whops.. yes you are absolutely right. I got confused between the IPAddr
>> and ldirectord.
>>
>> Yes you can either send me a patch, or I can do it. It´s really piece of
>> cake.
>
> Ok, I would suggest the attached patch for resolving this particular issue,
> but I think there are still some issues left;

thanks, i´ll take a spin to it today.

>
> 1) I'm wondering why this condition is needed; I think we can always use
> %{_var}/run/resource-agents in the current version.
> ----
> %if 0%{?fedora} >= 11 || 0%{?centos_version} > 5 || 0%{?rhel} > 5
> %dir %{_var}/run/heartbeat/rsctmp
> %else
> %dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents
> %endif
> ----

I can´t really answer this. It was part of the original linux-ha spec
file and I only carried it on to the new one. Maybe Dejan or Florian
have an explanation.

>
> 2) duplicated man8/ldirectord.8.gz is included both in resource-agents
> and ldirectord packages. it should not be a big problem though.
> ----
> %{_mandir}/man8/*.8*
> (...)
> %{_mandir}/man8/ldirectord.8*
> ----

Well we can´t ship duplicated files or packages will conflict at install
time. We will need to file list or something. Not a big deal really.

>
> 3) It can not build on RHEL5 with this error. I'd be glad if there is
> some kind of backward compatibility.
> ----
> %if 0%{?suse_version} == 0 && 0%{?fedora} == 0 && 0%{?centos_version}
> == 0 && 0%{?rhel} == 0
> %{error:Unable to determine the distribution/version. This is
> generally caused by missing /etc/rpm/macros.dist. Please install the
> correct build packages or define the required macros manually.}
> ----

This is an important check and we cannot remove it.

Last week we spent almost 2 days trying to figure out why the package
was not building correctly on some older releases/versions.

The bottom line is that some old releases do not export those variables
or set bits like %{dist} by default. Those variables are set only within
official build environments.

Without those variables, the whole spec file goes kaboom.
BuildRequires/Requires/conditionals are not parsed correctly and
therefor the results are unpredictable (assuming it builds at all).

The current spec file supports those 4 rpm based distros. Expanding it
to support more is absolutely fine, but it is also important that the
build environment is correct to guarantee the correct final rpm.

On newer distros, those variables are defined by /etc/rpm/macros.dist.

The simplest way to make sure that we are in a "known" build environment
is to check if at least one of those vars is defined.

This is an example for rhel5:

cat /etc/rpm/macros.dist
# dist macros.
%rhel 5
%dist .el5
%el5 1

For extra references:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481023
http://www.spinics.net/lists/rpm/msg06468.html

Fabio
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical

Re: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

dejan at suse

Jun 9, 2011, 4:17 AM

Post #10 of 12 (3472 views)

Permalink

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 09:40:10AM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 6/9/2011 7:07 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
>
> >
> >> Whops.. yes you are absolutely right. I got confused between the IPAddr
> >> and ldirectord.
> >>
> >> Yes you can either send me a patch, or I can do it. It´s really piece of
> >> cake.
> >
> > Ok, I would suggest the attached patch for resolving this particular issue,
> > but I think there are still some issues left;
>
> thanks, i´ll take a spin to it today.
>
> >
> > 1) I'm wondering why this condition is needed; I think we can always use
> > %{_var}/run/resource-agents in the current version.
> > ----
> > %if 0%{?fedora} >= 11 || 0%{?centos_version} > 5 || 0%{?rhel} > 5
> > %dir %{_var}/run/heartbeat/rsctmp
> > %else
> > %dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents
> > %endif
> > ----
>
> I can´t really answer this. It was part of the original linux-ha spec
> file and I only carried it on to the new one. Maybe Dejan or Florian
> have an explanation.

The linux-ha spec had just:

%dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents

The code above comes from this patchset :)

commit b40e6ac6c85f2835bbeacd73beed2602378b3a93
Author: Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Apr 7 09:14:09 2011 +0200

As Keisuke-san said, I don't think we need /var/run/heartbeat/rsctmp
anymore.

Cheers,

Dejan
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical

Re: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 9, 2011, 5:11 AM

Post #11 of 12 (3468 views)

Permalink

On 6/9/2011 1:17 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 09:40:10AM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 6/9/2011 7:07 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Whops.. yes you are absolutely right. I got confused between the IPAddr
>>>> and ldirectord.
>>>>
>>>> Yes you can either send me a patch, or I can do it. It´s really piece of
>>>> cake.
>>>
>>> Ok, I would suggest the attached patch for resolving this particular issue,
>>> but I think there are still some issues left;
>>
>> thanks, i´ll take a spin to it today.
>>
>>>
>>> 1) I'm wondering why this condition is needed; I think we can always use
>>> %{_var}/run/resource-agents in the current version.
>>> ----
>>> %if 0%{?fedora} >= 11 || 0%{?centos_version} > 5 || 0%{?rhel} > 5
>>> %dir %{_var}/run/heartbeat/rsctmp
>>> %else
>>> %dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents
>>> %endif
>>> ----
>>
>> I can´t really answer this. It was part of the original linux-ha spec
>> file and I only carried it on to the new one. Maybe Dejan or Florian
>> have an explanation.
>
> The linux-ha spec had just:
>
> %dir %attr (1755, root, root) %{_var}/run/resource-agents
>
> The code above comes from this patchset :)

Yes, sorry, my brain is leaking memory :)

The other directory comes from fedora spec file that Andrew did. We will
need to ask him why he choose it vs %{_var}/run/resource-agents.

Fabio
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical

Re: resource agents 3.9.1rc1 release [ In reply to ]

fdinitto at redhat

Jun 16, 2011, 6:30 AM

Post #12 of 12 (3442 views)

Permalink

Hi,

On 06/09/2011 07:07 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2011/6/8 Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto@redhat.com>:
>>>>> Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment?
>>>>> I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha)
>>>>> resource-agents-1.0.4
>>>>> so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version.
>>>>
>>>> Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available
>>>> on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL).
>>>
>>> ldirectord requires no extra packages to build on RHEL. It just a perl script.
>>> You may be concerned about the running environment; it requires perl-MailTools
>>> at least which can be obtained only from EPEL or CentOS extras, but
>>> ldirectord users
>>> have been already doing to collect such packages when they want to use it.
>>>
>>> I can provide a patch to the spec file if it's ok to build.
>>>
>>> Note that the (linux-ha) resource-agents should have been completely independent
>>> from libnet as of 1.0.4. Before that IPv6addr RA was the only
>>> dependency of libnet.

ldirector package is now built in rhel too and we also fixed the
duplicate man page issue, so you should be good to go.

Please let me know if there is any issue.

Thanks
Fabio
_______________________________________________
ha-wg-technical mailing list
ha-wg-technical@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical

Mailing List Archive

Mailing List Archive

Attached Files: