hi Hideo-san!

On 09/07/2011 01:50 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> However, my patch made a mistake.
>>> >  >  I do not seem to get the result of postfix status.
>>> >  >  It is necessary to watch log of postfix in the details of the problem 
>>> > after all.
>>> >  >
>>> >  >  Therefore, I withdraw the patch of the part of postfix status.
>>> >  >
>>> >  >  diff -r 19c97e0021f0 postfix
>>> >  >  --- a/postfix   Thu Jun 16 21:45:53 2011 +0900
>>> >  >  +++ b/postfix   Thu Jun 16 21:46:01 2011 +0900
>>> >  >  @@ -98,12 +98,8 @@
>>> >  >     postfix_running() {
>>> >  >         # run Postfix status if available
>>> >  >         if ocf_is_true $status_support; then
>>> >  >  -        output=`$binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1`
>>> >  >  -        ret=$?
>>> >  >  -        if [ $ret -ne 0 ]; then
>>> >  >  -            ocf_log err "Postfix status: '$output'." $ret
>>> >  >  -        fi
>>> >  >  -        return $ret
>>> >  >  +        $binary $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR status 2>&1
>>> >  >  +        return $?
>>> >  >         fi
>>> >  >
>>> >  >         # manually check Postfix's pid
[...]
> I thought that output could acquire the details of the problem of "postfix 
> status" with a former patch.
> And I thought the output of the details of the problem to be useful for an 
> operator.
> However, the details of the problem only were really reflected on log of 
> postfix in the environment that I tried.
>
> Therefore I want to withdraw the suggestion of the patch of this part.

does it hurt if we leave this patch in? i do not see any problem with
that code.

thanks,
raoul
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to