Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 11:07 +0200, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 02:39:16PM -0400, Doug Knight wrote: > > Hey Lars, > > please read the last line of my sig... :) > Sorry, I was jumping between email lists, and some of the others come in with a reply-to already set to the list, not the individual... > > Quick question: Comparing the printf text in your patch to the various > > checks in the drbd ocf script, should the patch be printf'ing "Not > > configured" as the script is checking for (DRBD_STATE_LOCAL checks)? If > > these should match, then I'd actually prefer to change the checks in the > > ocf script to match your patch (I like not having the embedded blank). > > > > Doug > > I think the 0.7 drbdsetup reported "Not configured". > So maybe we should stick with that? > > but since scripts tailored for 0.7 are likely to be broken for 8.0 > anyways, we could also change this to "Unconfigured". > I'm not sure yet, but I'm more for consistency with the /proc/drbd > output, so its probably going to be "Unconfigured". > > Good, I have already changed my script to look for Unconfigured, and now I can switch drbd back and forth between nodes using a Place constraint with no problem. Now, I'm working on tying the filesystem resource to it. I've got a couple of questions up on the HA-Linux list on that. There is so much overlap between the HA and the drbd work that sometimes its hard to tell which list I should send to (or just keeping track where I've asked what ;) Thanks! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20070424/0c0b5857/attachment.htm>