Re: [PATCH 3/3] Safeguard against writing to an active device of another node
From: Goldwyn Rodrigues <hidden>
Date: 2015-08-01 15:54:48
From: Goldwyn Rodrigues <hidden>
Date: 2015-08-01 15:54:48
On 08/01/2015 10:50 AM, Wols Lists wrote:
On 30/07/15 00:40, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:quoted
quoted
I was wondering if we could make it a run-time dependency though .. a bit like get_cluster_name. We can still do that later I guess. I'm not really sure what is best at the moment.Yes, I would second that: Making these functions a run-time dependency. We should have the ability for it to work by just installing libdlm (with the proper flags set), rather than recompiling the package for cluster features.Or - maybe unlikely but maybe not - what happens if somebody installs a binary that was built on a system WITH dlm, but is meant to run on a system WITHOUT dlm? Actually, wouldn't that be the typical case for a typical distro?
That's exactly the case we are trying to cover in the above explanation. IOw, we would be using -ldl for runtime compatibility. If libdlm is not present, cluster functions will be resolved to null and will not be executed/allowed. -- Goldwyn