[Linux-HA] heartbeat-2.1.3 spec file attempts to re-add hacluster UID under CentOS 5

[Brian Reichert]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 04:55:29PM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Brian Reichert <reichert at numachi.com> wrote:
> >  The heartbeat download page says
> 
> a lot of stuff thats horribly out of date

Perhaps.  But, my CentOS installation does have a yum repository
for 'extras', and that's where I got my initial heartbeat RPM; via
'yum install heartbeat'.  Scouring the internet for alternatives,
when these RPMs seemed canonical for CentOS distributions, didn't
seem wise.

> They're not randomly rolled :-)
> 
> I've organized for them to be automatically "rolled" for about 18
> different distro versions from a single tarball and spec file.
> I'm also the guy that writes a whole lot of the code you're using - so
> I claim some legitimacy for doing so :-)

I don't mean 'random' in any derogitory way.  But those RPMs are
different than what the heartbeat project distributes...

> Incidentally, if you're after RHEL packages, they're also available. Try:
>    http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/server:/ha-clustering/RHEL_5/ or
>    http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/server:/ha-clustering/RHEL_4/

Cool.  Other than this conversation, how would I have learned about
these RPMs?  Neither the HA project, nor the CentOS project, ever
mention them...

> >  I do note that the RPMs you're directing me to have an altered %pre
> >  scriptlet; has that been pushed back to the heartbeat project?
> 
> The spec files are totally different.
> This one is based on the one used by SUSE (since that's where I work),
> but have been modified based on consultation with clustering
> colleagues at Red Hat.

Splendid. :)  Why doesn't the source distribution or CentOS's
distribution use them?

I do have to apologize: I realize my end of this conversation sounds
snarky.  But:

- If people keep re-solving the spec file issues for RHEL5 and
  CentOS 5, why is the source distribution handing out a broken
  spec file?

- I think I'm describing a legitmate bug, and I think my proposed
  fix is legitmate.  I'm willing to open a bug report, but I wanted
  to air this on the mailing lists first.  Instead of being told
  that my research and effort has merit, I'm told "we solved this;
  use these custom RPMs we rolled that no one's ever heard of."

- If these fixes, that have already been solved by other members
  of the community, are not pushed back into the distribution, we're
  doomed to repeat this work endlessly.

So - I've opened a bug report, and have a suggested fix.  Hopefully,
_this_ fix will make it into the distribution (if people agree with
it, of course), and we can all stop re-discovering this problem...

  http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1869

-- 
Brian Reichert				<reichert at numachi.com>
55 Crystal Ave. #286			Daytime number: (603) 434-6842
Derry NH 03038-1725 USA			BSD admin/developer at large