| To: | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 18 Sep 2014 18:25:03 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20140918221624.GC8153@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20140708004813.GF22029@xxxxxxxxxx> <704756615.50701778.1410922470036.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20140918203331.GB8153@xxxxxxxxxx> <268509410.52061205.1411078424416.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20140918221624.GC8153@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | GrYDXoRiwVqgEtb7UKX7mcVk02llkw== |
| Thread-topic: | in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review |
----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > Yup, and no, it is not backward compatible. [...] > > > > What is the resulting / user-observed behaviour when a new daemon > > is started with the existing configuration format? > > The init script will fail when attempting to > . $PMWEBDOPTS > with a syntax error. > I see, thanks. Would you be comfortable if we released the daemon with that behaviour or should we be doing more in this area before its released? cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review, Frank Ch. Eigler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |