Re: RFS: slurm-llnl and munge
Hi Adriaan,
thanks for your comments. I have followed your suggestions for most of
the observations you made and I have some questions for the other:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:40:36AM +0200, Adriaan Peeters wrote:
> First: It is ok to repackage the upstream tar.bz2 as a tar.gz, but if
> you could persuade upstream to provide a tar.gz that is even better.
I could but I need to be persuaded first. Why do we need tar.gz?
> - I noticed an openssl certificate is created in postinst, is this
> absolutely necessary? What about people who want to create the
> certificate themselves? Same as above, provide an option to skip this.
The openssl certificate is necessary and, as I read by the doc, the
commands provided in the postinst script are the only way to generate it.
Providing an option for skipping this step would only cause the user to
manually perform the same action later. Does this make sense?
I used your observation about the certificate for the munge package.
User need a key file to use munge, but there are many options to create
it, therefore user can choose the method proposed by the configuration
script or do it manually. Instructions have been provided in the
README.Debian package.
I'm requesting again a sponsor that can review the packages
"slurm-llnl" and "munge" and consider their inclusion in the Debian
distribution. New debs can be found here:
http://www.na.icar.cnr.it/~oliva/debs/munge
http://www.na.icar.cnr.it/~oliva/debs/slurm-llnl
I hope I succeed correcting all issues you pointed out.
Thanks again for you help
--
Gennaro
Reply to: