[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#683299: unblock: open-vm-tools/2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-3



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 07/31/2012 03:45 PM, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> On 07/31/2012 03:40 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> Based on what?
> 
> tests on my computer.

As it was already explained to you before the release of Squeeze, this is far
far far away from proper testing for a package like open-vm-tools. It should
be tested on current (and maybe even older) ESX instalations. Ballooning,
live-migrations, snapshots with quiesce option and all the other nice features
need to work before it should be released as "stable".


>> If the system is under load, what guarantees that it won't take more
>> time?
> 
> as often there are no guarantees, but i tested it under quite some cpu and
> IO load, and it worked for me.
> 
> regarding testing migration.. even if it wouldn't help in 100% of all 
> cases, it's better to have it safer in most cases, the current testing 
> package does not have a sleep at all.

Why not add a proper way to handle it instead of a broken workaround?


>> Nope.  The proper way is for stop to not return until it's actually
>> stopped.
> 
> it does that. but again, it's safer in some cases to have the sleep, just
> to be on the safe side.

So you've patched your kill(1) to block until the process is gone? Luckily
this patch did not make it into Debian.

- -- 
 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=J106
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: