[Bug 192889] Review Request: openais standards based cluster framework

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: openais standards based cluster framework


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192889





------- Additional Comments From sdake at redhat.com  2006-06-05 15:17 EST -------
(In reply to comment #24)
> (In reply to comment #23)
> > (In reply to comment #22)
> > > "man openais_overview" mentions adding a user "ais" to the system.
Shouldn't the
> > > package be doing that?
> > > 
> > 
> > yes check out the new source rpm I have added the functionality.  Unfortunately
> > I am not sure which UID to use.  Is there a UID registry maintained for fedora?
> 
> There probably is but I don't know where (Bill Nottingham will probably know).
> However, unless there is a requirement for the account to have the same UID
> across different machines on a network (e.g. if they required shared access to
> the same files using NFS), you could just use the "-r" option of useradd to
> create a systen account and not worry about the exact UID.
> 
> Should any of the package files be owned by this user?
> 
> >> Would it be approriate to do a "/sbin/service openais condrestart" in %post to
> >> restart the service if it's running when the main package is upgraded?
> >> 
> >
> > good suggestion and that has been added.
> 
> Please add "|| :" to ensure that an initscript problem doesn't damage the rpm
> transaction.
> 
> You also need to add /sbin/service to Requires(post)
> 
> > > I think %{_libdir}/openais/lib*.so.* should be in the main package, and only
> > > %{_libdir}/openais/lib*.so should be in the devel package. This would be
> > > consistent with other packages. If the libs are only needed for the devel
> > > package, then the /etc/ld.so.conf.d/openais-*.conf file should be in the devel
> > > package and the scriptlet calls of ldconfig should be in the devel package
too.
> > > 
> > 
> > I don't understand why lib*.so.* should be in main and lib*.so be in devel?  As
> > an example, consider libevs.
> > The library is libevs.so.1.0.0.  There are two dynamic links libevs.so.1 and
> > libevs.so that point to libevs.so.1.0.0.
> 
> That's normal.
> 
> > With your suggestion this would put the real binary library libevs.so.1.0.0 and
> > one of the links libevs.so.1 into the main package and the link libevs.so into
> > the devel.
> 
> Yes, that is the normal thing to do. The real library libXYZ.so.a.b.c and the
> versioned symlink libXYZ.so.a are usually needed for runtime use, and the
> unversioned symlink libXYZ.so is usually only needed at compile/link time.
> 
> > But in fact they are all development libraries.
> 
> This is what's unusual (i.e. shared libs needed only for development). Is that
> really true? If so, it's correct to put the whole lot in the devel package.
> 

Thanks for all your great comments.  Yes indeed the libraries are only needed
for development so I'll keep them in the devel package.  I'll fix the rest of
the issues you pointed out.

Thanks for all your hard work in reviewing this package and beating it into
submission.  :)

I'll post a new update in a few hours with your suggested changes.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.