On Oct 13, 2010, at 4:41 AM, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: > > I think the main difference is that some of those libraries are capable > of providing services without the daemon running. Something that´s not > true for all packages. Let´s put aside for a minute the build/linking > case that used to be a problem many years ago, where maintaining build > machine was expensive (tho I understand it, let´s be clear). >
You are saying nothing can possibly benefit from using API in provided in -devel package and can utilize corosynclibs on it's own without having cluster software installed? libraries don't provide services at all, they do provide API > > I don´t remember exactly the detail here (I´d have to test it myself), > but let´s assume we do those changes in sync, how does "yum install > pacemaker" behave? Would pull in both corosync and heartbeat? or it will > force the user to select one? Without repeating myself too much, default > should install both IMHO and expert users can then drop the core they do > not want. it will pull nothing and it's a more reasonable approach, admin has to decide which stack to use. Lets take a bacula backup software as an example. It provides capability to use all kind of databases as backend server - mysql, postgresql, sqlite, so naturally it is linked with all those libraries, but they won't force you to install all database servers for that or even command line clients, because all they need is a library, which will provide API, not a "service" Vadym _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list Openais@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
