Joep Vesseur wrote: > On 03/11/09 00:26, Scott Rotondo wrote: > >> Nicolas Williams wrote: >> >>> But the i-team here might not have the resources to fix shmux to do the >>> right thing. If we agree that not allowing normal users to use fping >>> was a mistake, then shmux could be integrated as is with a bug opened in >>> the upstream community to have the -p option deprecated/replaced >>> with a design that does async connect() + timeouts. That would be the >>> pragmatic solution. >>> It's right! >> Assuming that consensus emerges that modifying shmux is the right >> solution, is it so critical to have shmux in Solaris now that we can't >> wait for it to be fixed before integrating? >> > > IMO, it should be acceptable to integrate the shmux as is for now, as it is useful to us after all(my daily work is mainly for nfs test, I always need to check/run something on many hosts, so this tool will be great help for me :) ), and we can update the package once the new version is available. > As an aside from an observer, I notice that there are Solaris packages > available from the shmux website. Yes, I ever downloaded and installed those packages on solaris directly, they all work like we build and install from the source codes. > Doesn't it make more sense to ask the > maintainer to submit shmux to the contrib repo? > > I'm not sure whether he would like to do. But anyway, I will send a mail to him to confirm. BTW, do you want the maintainer to submit the modified shmux based on our requirement instead of the current one? > Based on the discussion here, right now, I doubt it meets the integration > standards for inclusion in the WOS (as it stands right now; I don't want > to downplay the usefulness the tool itself might have). > > Joep > Thanks all again for focusing on this issue! Please continue to send out any ideas you have to push this program.
Thanks, Lily
