Hi.
Let's suppose ctdb move to main again.
Would that be a way to lead Samba maintainers to re-activate clustering and
ctdb configure options at build time?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
Hi. My suggestion is to discuss moving ctdb to main again. Clustered
samba with ctdb is really nice and easy HA solution that should be
available for installation. Just want to know what is the reason for not
including it at the moment? Thanks.
--
You received this bug notification because you ar
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Invalid
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://l
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => In Progress
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://l
After some discussion we arent going to include this in main.
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-b
There are 3 failing tests for me:
TEST FAILED: simple/11_ctdb_ip.sh (status 1) (duration: 2s)
TEST FAILED: simple/16_ctdb_config_add_ip.sh (status 1) (duration: 42s)
TEST FAILED: simple/52_ctdb_fetch.sh (status 1) (duration: 31s)
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Alexander Sack (asac) =
FYI, the rules aren't -j safe:
clean: clean-patched unpatch
The testsuite isn't run during build; that would definitely be welcome;
I could run it with ./configure && make && cd tests && scripts/run_tests
simple/*.sh here.
There's a new upstream available.
So overall, I don't mind too much if t
Suggestion: /var/log/log.ctdb sounds kind of a stupid logname, how about
ctdb.log instead?
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@li
Will you move to upstart? In any case, please change the init script to call
bash explicitly instead of using /bin/sh:
% checkbashisms debian/ctdb.init
possible bashism in debian/ctdb.init line 215 (should be 'b = a'):
if [ yes == "$CTDB_SUPPRESS_COREFILE" ]; then
possible bashism in debian/
NB: tdb is already in main, just tdb-tools isn't, but that's just a
binary package from tdb.
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@
The gcc warnings should be addressed as well.
chuck
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.co
Took a quick first look; maintenance was indeed solid in Debian; will
the server team subscribe to the bugs in Ubuntu?
I was a bit surprized to find:
configure: WARNING: the provided readdir() is broken
in the build log and *many*:
server/ctdb_lockwait.c:140: warning: ignoring return value of 'wri
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Martin Pitt (pitti)
** Changed in: ctdb (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Martin Pitt (pitti) => Alexander Sack (asac)
--
MIR for ctdb
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497035
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bu
13 matches
Mail list logo
