On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:13:50AM +0000, Martin Waite wrote: > Hi Guido > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Guido Günther <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 04:56:17PM +0000, Martin Waite wrote: > >> Hi Guido, > >> > >> I have abandoned using RHCS on Debian Stable. RHCS 2 in Fedora and > >> Centos do not have the bug, and unfortunately in my production > >> environment I will be tied to using RHCS 2. > >> > >> I do believe that the bug has gone away in version 3 of RHCS, but > >> version 2 of RHCS as supplied by Lenny is virtually useless: it > >> cannot handle failover. > >> > >> As a newcomer to using RHCS, it took a few days to figure out that the > >> problems I was having were not caused by my configuration errors (of > >> which I had many) but were actually caused by a bug. > >> > >> Is there some way of either removing the package or providing some > >> warning to potential users that it doesn't work ? Marking the bug as > >> closed seems inappropriate because it implies that the bug has been > >> resolved - which is not true. Would "wont fix" be better ? > > The bug is fixed in RHCS 3.0.2 so closing it is apropriate. I wouldn't > > object to remove RHCS 2 from Lenny though since I never got anything to > > work with RHCS2 either (neither rgmanager nor gfs). I'm cc'ing the > > maintainers of the RHCS2 package in Lenny. Is there anybody really using > > RHCS 2 in Lenny in production? If not we should remove it. > > Cheers, > > -- Guido > > > > On further thought, it is probably best to just leave things as they > are. From exchanges with the linux-cluster mailing list, some people > do use the lenny package - but patch and rebuild the source package > themselves. Can you identify the patch? If it's small we can fix this up in a point release. Help on this would really be appreciated since I'm not running Cluster 2. Cheeers, -- Guido
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
