Mon May 9 17:01:30 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Beta #3 coming RSN
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Beta #3 coming RSN
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Monday 09 May 2005 08:43, Christopher Browne wrote: > Devrim GUNDUZ wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, 5 May 2005, Christopher Browne wrote: > >> The one thing that seems conspicuously outstanding is the handling of > >> the altperl tools in RPM packaging. > >> > >> Devrim Gunduz has been working on this, and it appears that it is very > >> close to working. If we can get to the point of it actually working, > >> which I think just involves choosing a place for the Perl scripts to go, > >> then that is a clear level of readiness for this. > > > > Ok, I have a new patch that seems to fix all our problems: > > > > http://postgresql.gunduz.org/slony/patches/slony-rpm.patch > > > > This patch: > > > > 1. Modifies the spec.in file for rpm builds. > > 2. Changes slon_tools.conf to slon_tools.conf-sample in tools/altperl/ . > > slon_tools.conf is a non-existent file and breaks RPM dependencies. > > > > On Red Hat EL ES 4 both make and make rpm worked. > > > > Could you please review and apply it? > > I have one issue with it, namely the proposed changes to various Perl > scripts thus: > > replacing... > ! $CONFIG_FILE = '@@SYSCONFDIR@@/slon_tools.conf'; > > with... > ! $CONFIG_FILE = '@@SYSCONFDIR@@/slon_tools.conf-sample'; > > I don't think we should change all the scripts to automatically refer > what is very clearly a sample file. > > The sample is just that, a sample that should get edited and renamed to > slon_tools.conf before scripts try to use it. > > I have committed all but the > "s/slon_tools.conf/slon_tools.conf-sample/g" changes. > > Personally, I don't think that the default filename should be changed. > The scripts will indeed break when they discover they haven't a config > file. That strikes me as being consistent with the installation output: > > echo "Slony1 has been successfully installed. Before running Slony1," > echo "be sure to edit /etc/slon.conf-sample and rename it to" > echo "/etc/slon.conf" > > If you don't "be sure to edit" the file, then everything breaks. > > But the sample is hardly a legitimate configuration; I don't think I > want it to "work." > > I'm willing to go along with what people agree on; if there a > preponderance of support for changing the default filename to > @@SYSCONFDIR@@/slon_tools.conf-sample, I see no value in fighting any > battles over it. But it doesn't seem right to me... I agree whole heartly with you on this Chris, a sample file is just that, and it not intended to be used production running config. > _______________________________________________ > Slony1-general mailing list > Slony1-general at gborg.postgresql.org > http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general -- Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. http://www.wavefire.com ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] Beta #3 coming RSN
- Next message: [Slony1-general] Beta #3 coming RSN
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list