> On Oct. 14, 2016, 4:34 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni/cni.cpp, lines 198-209
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52671/diff/2/?file=1532085#file1532085line198>
> >
> >     Ditto.

Yeah we actually don't need this anymore. Didn't realize `os::which` also 
checks the permissions on the binary, and not just its existence in the path.


- Avinash


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52671/#review152629
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 12, 2016, 5:49 a.m., Avinash sridharan wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52671/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 12, 2016, 5:49 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Jie Yu and Qian Zhang.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-6344
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6344
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The `--network_cni_plugins_dir` was initially designed to take in a
> single directory where all the CNI plugins were expected to be
> present. This however is limiting since the operator will have to
> ensure that all 3rd party plugins are installed in the same location
> which a very hard constraint.
> 
> To make things simpler we are therefore converting the
> `--network_cni_plugins_dir` from a single directory into a search
> path.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni/cni.cpp 
> 1b22b28825e8160f659c3cbac37cc576f01666d5 
>   src/slave/flags.cpp 491d10f6a8a7ea8adbfe0a09f5fce79943bccfac 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52671/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make, make check and sudo ./bin/mesos-tests.sh --gtest_filter=Cni*
> 
> Also ran a single node cluster and tested the flags by moving the bridge 
> plugin from directory to another.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Avinash sridharan
> 
>

Reply via email to