On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, Ben Ragg wrote: > ...having a look through the code, there seems to be an evil bit of > logic that will attempt to disable the hostgroup rather than the host > when ever the host exists in a hostgroup by itself. What's worse is it > appears it'll only attempt to disable the first hostgroup, ie in the > above example hostgroup a.
is what you're seeing explained by this? http://linux.kernel.org/pipermail/mon/2007-June/001637.html _______________________________________________ mon mailing list mon@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
