You should be wary of asking me for an opinion... 8 paragraphs to follow ;-). 
Oh yeah, and no need to release the one from me in the moderation queue.  I 
gotta work on choosing the right 'from' address.  D'oh!

I've been disturbed for some time by the incompatibilities of the si RPM 
install with the various distros.  For example, si-server clobbers 
/etc/xinetd.d/rsync... but what if the admin is like me and has changed the 
xinetd.d config file to specifically run with systemimager's rsyncd.conf?

This spec flie goes further down that road in that it assumes that the default 
place for the rsync_stubs directory is the only possible place.  That is, it 
ignores the content of the systemimager.conf file, which is capable of 
relocation of the input directories of mkrsyncd_conf.  It further compounds 
that by going on to write 'replacement' stub files in what it presumes to be 
the right place.  Again, I actually *do* change the content of 
systemimager.conf, my /etc/systemimager/rsync_stubs dir is empty, and I like 
it that way ;-).

In my own situation, I'd consider this behavior wrong even if it did respect 
the systemimager.conf file, because it would do the wrong thing for 'non 
systemimager' rsync items (things that would go in a nnlocal stub). It would 
also do the wrong thing if an image line had a trailing blank on the end of 
it.

This is akin to the recent bug report where the user wishes us to run 
chkconfig 'on' for netbootmond and rsyncd as the default behavior for the 
rpm.  I'd vote no on that, too, because the *first* thing I do after an rpm 
install is to remove /etc/init.d/systemimager-* and go back and repair the 
damage to the xinetd.d directory.  I also consider this specfile, although it 
improves in that area, to be doing the wrong thing.  I, for example, would 
prefer that the server rpm 'notice' whether or not xinetd was installed, and 
would just edit the xinetd.d configuration.  This behavior would be arguably 
"wrong" for debian or rh7, though.

So, I've deliberately avoided making new modifications to the pre and post 
install scriptlets because I have been very wary of making these (what I 
consider to be) inappropriate behaviors change further, which is what I think 
this specfile does.  I think the current behavior is wrong, but at least I 
know how to get unfouled after an RPM install.  I'm a big fan of 'first, do 
no harm' as the default behavior.  If that means that you do nothing 
automatic during RPM installation, so be it.  My outlook is strongly colored 
by the fact that I know what si is doing under the hood, I heavily customize 
its behavior, I need my rsync server to do more than si, and I know where to 
find the configuration files.  So, I'd actually prefer to see the pre and 
post install scriptlets be less harmful by either killing them completely, or 
making them understand, even more fully than this example does, what they are 
modifying.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.  But, right now, I'd much rather see 
this 'how do I get configured, upgraded from [23].0.x, converted from init.d 
to xinetd.d, etc" problem addressed with better documentation (wiki) and/or 
in scripts that go in the doc directory.  Those could be run at the admin's 
discretion, or used as examples of the work that needs to be done to 'finish' 
a configuration.

Other than that, the file appears to be well written with liberal and 
consistent use of the undocumented rpm macros.  I've written many spec files 
that use the same double underscore style macros for my own 'personal' RPMs.  
I get nervous, however, about using anything starting with double underscore 
in a file for public consumption.   I've always adhered to the convention 
that __ means 'private'.  That is, I have concerns that redhat or fedora or 
debian would change the content or meaning of those macros if it suited them, 
because they are not published in any public specification that I know of.  I 
might be wrong about that though.  If I am, then I'd certainly vote for doing 
the build internals in this style.

Ditto the above sentiments for the fact that this spec file uses bash specific 
syntax.  I don't know if there is a specification someplace that affirms that 
the default rpm shell is bash and not 'just sh'?  I've never seen any other 
specfile that uses the [[ ]] bash syntax.

On Tuesday 13 April 2004 17:53, Brian Elliott Finley wrote:
> One more try, with the attachment...
>
> Thus spake Brian Elliott Finley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >Michael's update attached...
> >
> >I'd be curious to see what you think.  And his source rpm can be found
> >here:
> >
> >        http://caos.nplus1.net/~mej/systemimager-3.2.2-1.src.rpm
> >
> >Please combine your spec file and his as you see fit.
> >
> >Cheers, -Brian
> >
> >Thus spake Brian Elliott Finley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >>Jerry,
> >>
> >>Michael Jennings is sending me some spec file updates he's recommending.
> >>I'll pass them along for your review soon as I receive them.  Let's not
> >>worry about building the RPMs until we get those updates -- apparently
> >>Michael is rpmizing 3.2.2 as we speak, for the http://www.caosity.org/
> >>distribution, so we should have them plenty soon.
> >>
> >>Cheers, -Brian
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>---------------------------------------------------------
> >>Brian Elliott Finley              Argonne, MCS Division
> >>Phone: 630.631.6621               http://thefinleys.com
> >>gpg  --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net  --recv-keys 10F8EE52
> >>---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> >>Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> >>GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> >>administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Sisuite-devel mailing list
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-devel
> >
> >--
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> >Brian Elliott Finley              Argonne, MCS Division
> >Phone: 630.631.6621               http://thefinleys.com
> >gpg  --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net  --recv-keys 10F8EE52
> >---------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
Sisuite-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-devel

Reply via email to