On 12/07/18 16:51 +0200, Salvatore D'angelo wrote: > My “talent” as you said comes from a bad knowledge of system vs upstart vs > sysV mechanism.
Rule of thumb: aim at what's a first class citizen in your distribution/system of choice -- for your particular situation, others already indicated the choice is obvious. Once you know which init system to target, you can become proficient pretty fast with the basics (immediate start/stop, on-boot enablement or otherwise). > Let me only underline that I compile directly on target system and > not a different machine. That simplifies the surface, which is always better for troubleshooting. > Moreover, all ./configure requirements are met because when this > didn’t happen the ./configure stopped (at least this is what I > expected). Rather a false assumption: some "features" are merely optional, meaning the relevant functionality and/or files will simply be skipped, without any fatal stop/big noise. That's intentional and desired, one size doesn't fit all. > However, I’ll pay more attention the next time I’ll run ./configure > to the output. Great. > For the moment, I have the workaround mentioned in the previous > email because I only developed a proof of concepts. > When we will start to create production code I’ll try to better > understand how systemd works and how to use it to fix my issue. Note that systemd per se is not causing any interferences, it's just a mix of shortcomings (starting with a likely lack of some files in your installation and ending with pettiness of LSB compatibility software) that is to be blamed. Luckily, it's solvable. On the contrary, with systemd in the picture, you'll get some small benefits incl. a possibility to run services through their native systemd unit files (a tuned collection of directives determining how to optimally run particular daemons) when provided, amongst others. > >> On 12 Jul 2018, at 15:47, Jan Pokorný <jpoko...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 11/07/18 18:43 +0200, Salvatore D'angelo wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 18:43 +0200, Salvatore D'angelo wrote: >>>>>>> [...] question is pacemaker install >>>>>>> /etc/init.d/pacemaker script but its header is not compatible >>>>>>> with newer system that uses LSB. >> >> Combining LSB and "newer system" in one sentence is sort of ridiculous >> since LSB dates back to 2002 (LSB 1.1 seems to be first to actually >> explain headers like Default-Start [1]), and the concept of system >> initialization in the Linux context was gradually refined with >> projects like upstart and systemd. Sorry, forgot: [1] -- Nazdar, Jan (Poki)
pgphpxBhdizDM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
