Re: CVS on oss.sgi.com

On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 23:05, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2002-05-04T18:31:25,
>    Martin Bene <[email protected]> said:
> 
> > I just looked over the version now in CVS and tried to see what has changed
> > compared to the version I've got running here (previous CVS + some Suse
> > Patches + Olivers glibc patches). I'll try to sum up the most obvious
> > changes now available from CVS (again):
> 
> Thanks for the summary. I posted (I think) short announcements to the list
> about them, but I _really_ ought to put them into a ChangeLog in the source,
> which is probably a very good idea.
> 
> >  - olivers gcc 2.4 patches are in (slightly modifed: cleanup is called from
> >  a different file and ALL cleanup is done using the new interface). BTW,
> >  function fs2d_has_xprt in FailSafe/cluster_admin/cmd/cdbd/src is dead code
> >  and should be removed.
> 
> Right, this I discussed Oliver before modifying it. The dead code removal is
> not that urgent, I will have to check it some time though.
it was missing in my patch sending to lars... it's my fault... i've
removed it from the patch thinking, the latest patches have removed it
already. 

but it doesn't matter... the important things are in... 

> 
> >  so resource scripts. I'll post a couple of resource script changes in use
> >  here when I've cleand them up a bit: modify/reenable drbd, add postgres,
> >  modify apache to add SSL parameter.
> 
> Cool, this would be helpful.
> 
> > Conspiciously missing from the CVS version: Some of the fixes used for the
> > suse RPMs, esp:
> 
> >  - enable stonith
> >  (ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/failsafe/patches/failsafe-enable_stonith.dif)
> 
> This was because back then, not everyone wanted to build with STONITH; there
> was also VACM etc around, and the FailSafe RPMs provided by SGI were build
> without STONITH. These days, I guess everyone builds with STONITH, so it ought
> to be folded back in.
> 
> >  - fix a gcc3 compile error (ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/failsafe/patches/failsafe-gcc3.dif)
> 
> Hrm, I will have to check this; this probably ought to go in.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
>     Lars Marowsky-Brée <[email protected]>
> 
> -- 
> Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me.
> 	--- Gregory F. Pfister
>