On Fri, 24 May 2013, Mikolaj Golub wrote:
> > > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
> > > ...
> > > > The reason I'm asking is that it could lead to changes in hast-related
> > > > scripts
> > > > which one use in production.
> > >
> > >
> > > Any chance we could do this is 2 sta
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:08:28PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Pete,
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2013, Pete French wrote:
>
> > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
> > ...
> > > The reason I'm asking is that it could lead to changes in hast-related
> > > scripts
> > > which one use i
Pete,
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Pete French wrote:
> > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
> ...
> > The reason I'm asking is that it could lead to changes in hast-related
> > scripts
> > which one use in production.
>
>
> Any chance we could do this is 2 stages - first being to add 'l
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
...
> The reason I'm asking is that it could lead to changes in hast-related
> scripts
> which one use in production.
Any chance we could do this is 2 stages - first being to add 'list' to give us
a chnace
ti change scripts over, then make the
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:54:56AM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> is there any objection for MFCing the change introduced in
>
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
>
> (the most major change: compacting output of `hastctl status' to one-liner
> per
> provid
Dear colleagues,
is there any objection for MFCing the change introduced in
http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/248291
(the most major change: compacting output of `hastctl status' to one-liner per
provider; old output is retained as `list' command)
to at least stable/9 ?
The reason I'm
