On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 01:11:48PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > --- a/kdumpctl
> > > +++ b/kdumpctl
> > > @@ -249,8 +249,8 @@ function check_rebuild()
> > > EXTRA_BINS="$EXTRA_BINS $CHECK_FILES"
> > > files="$KDUMP_CONFIG_FILE $kdump_kernel $EXTRA_BINS"
> > >
> > > - if [ -f $FENCE_KDUMP_CONFIG ]; then
> > > - files="$files $FENCE_KDUMP_CONFIG"
> > > + if [ -f $FENCE_KDUMP_CONFIG_FILE ]; then
> > > + files="$files $FENCE_KDUMP_CONFIG_FILE"
> > > fi
> > why don't we get rid of this fence kdump config file. I thought we agreed
> > that fence_kdump_send options will be specified in /etc/kdump.conf using
> > a new option.
> > No package owns /etc/sysconfig/fence_kdump_send. So trying to retain
> > it does not make sense.
> As we agreed in previous email, current API for Pacemaker will be untouched.
In Fedora generally we don't have the requirement of maintaing full
backward compatibility with older fedora versions. And pacemaker code
is so new in Fedora. It went in very recently.
So I would rather prefer to clean that up and ask pacemaker users to
specify options in /etc/kdump.conf instead of using a file.
Otherwise we will be stuck with this code for a long time.
Thinking more about it, let us maintain that file for some more time. Let
us get this new API working and once we are confident that this API is
working well then we should work with pacemaker team to move to new API
and rid of old assumptions.
While writing code don't assume that pacemaker can't make use of
/etc/kdump.conf fence_kdump_args. In fact that's how I want to document
it so that all the new users use fence_kdump_args intead of a file
to specify arguments.