| To: | Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Lukas Berk <lberk@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 11 Jun 2015 22:36:25 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <5579F1D9.2070008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <55798552.6040707@xxxxxxxxxx> <87zj46j8qc.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> <5579F1D9.2070008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | IchQTvtOiSpeurg3+MkrcPm1Dglyxg== |
| Thread-topic: | pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch |
Hi guys, ----- Original Message ----- > On 12/06/15 06:22, Lukas Berk wrote: > > ... The other major > > difference is where the various config files should be shipped (such as > > pmieconf/ and pmlogconf/ files, that coincide with no split-pmdas). > > Makepkgs ships them in the pmda-foo packages, and fedora ships them in > > the base pcp package. Which do people think is correct? > > If possible, these should be in the base PCP package. I've update pcp.spec.in to handle this. cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | pcp updates: build, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Mark Goodwin |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Ken McDonell |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Mark Goodwin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |