Hey Jan, Thanks for the patches. Because this is a pretty big change (will be bigger if I use patch 9/9), I'll only apply to the head branch. I hope to release 0.8.1 beta in the not to distant future.
As a whole, I think all the patches are fine. I actually don't have an issue for patch 9/9. However, it conflicts with a previous Redhat patch :-) I had the naming scheme you propose in the patch (not having freeipmi prefixed in front of init scripts and such). However, Ben Woodard @ Redhat said I had to put the prefix in front to pass rpmlint which requires the prefix for naming daemons and init scripts. I've CCed Ben. Perhaps you guys can debate what takes priority. I'm fine with either one. But since two Redhat requests are conflicting, I'm not sure which distro rule wins out :-) Al On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 12:45 +0200, Jan Safranek wrote: > Hi, > > here comes short sequence of various small and stupid fixes in bmc-watchdog > and > ipmidetectd initscripts. The goal is to make them LSB-compliant, with proper > exit codes and actions, which is required by Fedora guidelines. > > I am maintainer of Fedora packages and I can have these changes there as > Fedora > patches, but you might find some of them interesting. I intentionally made the > patches as small as possible, so you can pick only some of them. > > Feel free to comment any of the patches, I expect you won't like all of them > (especially the last one :). > > Jan > > > _______________________________________________ > Freeipmi-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://*lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel > -- Albert Chu [email protected] Computer Scientist High Performance Systems Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory _______________________________________________ Freeipmi-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
