On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:31:16 +0000 Simon Wilkinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 17 Dec 2009, at 00:25, Derrick Brashear wrote: > > Well, the bosserver could attempt to stat() salvageserver and error > > instead of trying an "fs" configuration if it exists. Considering our location for the salvageserver binary is at best a guess, I think that may have too high a chance for false-positives and refusing to start. And there's also the case if you just overwrite the binaries with non-DAFS binaries to roll back, that obviously won't work. > Or we could change the name of the binary for the dafs fileserver. > That would ensure that the old 'fs' configuration would fail, rather > than doing something unintended. Possible problems are that if the old binaries are still there, you effectively fail to upgrade; not a bad side effect, but it's harmless enough that the user may never know they're not running the new version they thought they installed. That also potentially 'breaks' existing DAFS installations in the same way. Still not horrible, but again, the user may never know. Right now I'm leaning towards not allowing the 'fs' configuration when DAFS is enabled unless you pass a switch, or somehow explicitly mark it in some other way, as it's a very uncommon case. That would make the configuration invalid with pre-1.6 bosservers, though... but at least it would fail obviously. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
