On 09/19/14 at 09:12am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:03:04AM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> On 09/18/14 at 09:24am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 01:49:09PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> > > Upstream makedumpfile contains some sample eppic scripts for reference.
> > > Now pull the whole scripts directory into kexec-tools-eppic package.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: WANG Chao <chaowang(a)redhat.com>
> > If scripts are part of makedumpfile, then it should be part of kexec-tools
> > package and not kexec-tools-eppic?
> # rpm -ql kexec-tools-eppic
> These sample scripts are eppic language, and they won't work without
> eppic_makedumpfile.so. It makes sense to put them along with
> eppic_makedumpfile.so. That means in kexec-tools-eppic package.
I don't think it is a good idea to take this code away from makedumpfile
and pack into kexec-tools-eppic package. If there is a dependency, then
we need to make kexec-tools package dependent on kexec-tools-eppic.
eppic_makedumpfile.so is also built within makedumpfile. But we packed
it in kexec-tools-eppic. I don't why we did that at the first place
I think more we move away from upstream, more prblems it will create for
us going down the line.
We don't move away from upstream. We just pack makedumpfile binaries
into two packages. It's already done like that.
So I would still prefer that we pacakge these scripts as part of
kexec-tools as these are part of makeudmpfile upstream. And if need be
create a dependency on kexec-tools-eppic package during installation.
I don't think putting these scripts into kexec-tools make sense. Because
eppic support is more like a "plugin" for makedumpfile. Now we put
eppic_makedumpfile.so in kexec-tools-eppic, we should put the sample
scripts for this "plugin" all together with the "plugin". It
sound right to me to seperate the sample eppic scripts and
eppic_makedumpfile.so, because the sample eppic scripts standalone
doesn't work and people have no idea what're these for.