[lustre-discuss] lnetctl & /etc/sysconfig/lnet.conf Usage
Di Natale, Giuseppe
dinatale2 at llnl.gov
Thu May 18 17:25:07 PDT 2017
Thanks for the response! From my understanding, /etc/sysconfig is intended to contain files which are sourceable by shell scripts. Below is a link to a blog post that does a good job explaining.
To me, /etc/ is the catch all for other system level configuration that isn't part of some daemon. But, I could be wrong on that and would welcome other opinions. I am by no means an expert myself.
From: E.S. Rosenberg <esr+lustre at mail.hebrew.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 8:57 AM
To: Di Natale, Giuseppe
Cc: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] lnetctl & /etc/sysconfig/lnet.conf Usage
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Di Natale, Giuseppe <dinatale2 at llnl.gov<mailto:dinatale2 at llnl.gov>> wrote:
I am working on a patch to move /etc/sysconfig/lnet.conf to /etc/lnet.conf. For those interested in the patch, it can be found at https://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/26971/.
I am no expert on LSB but should it be under plain /etc/ and not say /etc/lustre/ or /etc/lnet/ at least? (where the logical thing to me is /etc/lustre but I understand there are plans to seperate between lustre and lnet)
Also what is bad about /etc/sysconfig/ (other then it being fairly RH specific)?
The patch, even though it is simple, could impact those already using lnetctl & /etc/sysconfig/lnet.conf. So if you are using those to configure lnet, please do let me know. I'm trying to get an idea of how many sites use it before the change gets accepted.
Giuseppe Di Natale
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lustre-discuss