pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Seeking testers - systemd service support

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Seeking testers - systemd service support
From: Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:49:27 +1000
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <778534029.37490152.1408937390035.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1970205420.36245669.1408665579915.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <53F6F461.5050707@xxxxxxxxxx> <53F6FCD2.5000604@xxxxxxxxxx> <778534029.37490152.1408937390035.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0
On 08/25/2014 01:29 PM, Nathan Scott wrote:
Built on RHEL6 (RHEL6.6beta actually) and after a virgin install
the services are all enabled by default (yay!, oops :). This
doesn't look right :

Heh.  Was this a Makepkgs build?  I think this is because, in that case
(and not via fedora.spec builds), we use unmodified rc scripts which
default to enabled.  For the "official" RPM builds, the spec %install
contains...
>
> ... which you wrote IIRC ;)
>

yes it was a Makepkgs build, and yep - sorry I forgot about that bit
of sed hackery :}

# default chkconfig off for Fedora and RHEL
for f in 
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_initddir}/{pcp,pmcd,pmlogger,pmie,pmwebd,pmmgr,pmproxy}; do
         test -f "$f" || continue
         sed -i -e '/^# chkconfig/s/:.*$/: - 95 05/' -e '/^# 
Default-Start:/s/:.*$/:/' $f
done

Maybe we should commit that change into the rc scripts and make both
builds the same in that respect?

I think that's a good idea - we'd end up with Makepkgs builds defaulting to
services off for virgin installs (same as Fedora and RHEL). Can anyone
think of any downsides to that? Documentation updates anywhere?

-- Mark

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>