pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] in search of pcpfans.git fche/pmwebd (graphite) branch review

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>