On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:17 PM, James Page <james.page@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 05/12/12 19:41, Dan Mick wrote: >> The story as best I know it is that we're trying to transition to >> and use upstart where possible, but that the upstart config does >> not (yet?) try to do what the init.d config did. That is, it >> doesn't support options to the one script, but rather separates >> daemons into separate services, and does not reach out to remote >> machines to start daemons, etc. >> >> The intent is that init.d/ceph is left for non-Upstart distros, >> AFAICT. >> >> Tv had some design notes here: >> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg09314.html >> >> We need better documentation/rationale here at least. > > Maybe it might be better if the ceph init script and the ceph upstart > configuration did not namespace clash; how about shifting the name of > the ceph upstart configuration to ceph-all? Yeah, this or something very similar is definitely the correct solution. Sage recently added the "ceph" upstart job, and we didn't put it through sufficient verification prior to release in order to notice this issue. Users who aren't using upstart (I expect that's all of them) should just delete the job after running the package install. We'll certainly sort this out prior to the next release; I'm not sure if we want to roll a v0.55.1 right away or not. -Greg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
