| To: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch |
| From: | Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 12 Jun 2015 06:38:49 +1000 |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <87zj46j8qc.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <55798552.6040707@xxxxxxxxxx> <87zj46j8qc.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 |
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.The reason is that pmie and pmlogger can both be used to monitor a remote system, so none of the pmda-foo package may not be installed locally. Ditto for any pmchart views (and pmview configs when they appear in the build). |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Lukas Berk |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | pcp updates: more qa stuff, Ken McDonell |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Lukas Berk |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] pcp fedora.spec review comments and patch, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |