change commands for pcs-0.10 #513
Conversation
|
Are these changes backwards compatible? I'm guessing not. |
|
unfortunately they are not |
|
@mark8x57 thanks. There are some tests in the |
| @@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ | |||
| # is applied. | |||
| # TODO - make it run only once | |||
| exec { 'pcs_cluster_auth': | |||
| command => "pcs cluster auth ${node_string} ${auth_credential_string}", | |||
| command => "pcs host auth ${node_string} ${auth_credential_string}", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not a corosync expert. Can you explain a bit why do you this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Syntax has changed from previous version. See 'man pcs' -> Changes in pcs-0.10.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but for which operating systems? as far as I know it works fine on the operating systems listed in the metadata.json. If this is version specific we could use a fact for the corosync/pcs version and use the correct command based on that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
of course this makes sense. i had to make the change for ubuntu 20.04 because ubuntu 16.04 has no maintenance anymore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe you can take a look at the work in #499 . That already looks promising. It would be nice if we could get this implemented without breaking backwards compatibility.
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
Include @mark8x57's changes from voxpupuli#513 along with version gating to still maintain support for pcs 0.9 (although one would have to check if any pcs 0.9 is still in use by supported distributions). Co-authored-by: Mark Habenicht <[email protected]>
|
Dear @mark8x57, thanks for the PR! This is Vox Pupuli Tasks, your friendly Vox Pupuli GitHub Bot. I noticed that your pull request contains merge conflict. Can you please rebase? You can find my sourcecode at voxpupuli/vox-pupuli-tasks |
|
Obsoleted by #499 |
No description provided.