On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:22 PM, nicolas vigier <boklm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Jan Friesse wrote: > >> nicolas vigier napsal(a): >>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Steven Dake wrote: >>> >>>> On 07/10/2012 07:48 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Steven Dake<sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Corosync may not be used with pacemaker, but rather using the C APIs. >>>>> >>>>> I think you mean s/not/not only/ ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> ya brain malfunction >>>> >>>> thanks for the catch :) >>> >>> Ah yes, corosync can be used without pacemaker. However, the "Before" >>> option in systemd unit file is only used for ordering, when both >>> services are installed and enabled, and is independent of the requirement >>> dependencies. So this should not make any change for the people who >>> don't have a pacemaker service enabled. >>> >> >> I don't like that patch from conceptual point of view. Should really >> corosync has Before dependency for EVERY SINGLE ONE service which can use >> that? I don't thing so. I believe correct solution is to have Corosync as >> dependency in Pacemaker (or any other service). What do you think? > > Yes, an other option is to use the After option in Pacemaker unit file > instead. Maybe it's better as Pacemaker knows all the services it > supports. I will submit a patch to Pacemaker. Thanks. Agreed. Happy to accept such a patch. _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
