On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:06:04AM +0100, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 07:17:52AM +0100, Marko Potocnik wrote: > > Actually the symbolic link is the beautifier. We use different versions of > > database server and using the symbolic link mount point is always the same. > > > > Do I need to do anything else for the patch to make it into the main branch? > > I'm not sure about the availability of "readlink", > and it's actual behaviour (exit codes), if it exists. > > But this patch should still behave anyways, so that's OK.
Yes, though there could be some ugly messages on stderr. Perhaps to redirect stderr to null. > I personally feel that using symlinks as mount points > should not even work, and will confuse more than beautify. Good point. > But maybe that's just me. Definitely not just you. Thanks, Dejan > -- > : Lars Ellenberg > : LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability > : DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com > > DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria. > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list: [email protected] > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: > http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: [email protected] http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
