On 19/10/17 22:49 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> The reconciling patchset is not merged yet, but I'd say it's in the
> good shape: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/libqb/pull/266
>
> Testing is requested, of course ;)
We finally got to merge it with some ulterior changes, and there's
just a few more
On 19/10/17 22:49 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 03/08/17 20:50 +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
>>> Proper solution:
>>> - give me few days to investigate better ways to deal with this
>
> well, that estimate was off... by far :)
>
> But given the goals of
> - as high level of isolation of the
On 19/10/17 21:49, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> On 03/08/17 20:50 +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
>>> Proper solution:
>>> - give me few days to investigate better ways to deal with this
>
> well, that estimate was off... by far :)
>
> But given the goals of
> - as high level of isolation of the client
On 03/08/17 20:50 +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
>> Proper solution:
>> - give me few days to investigate better ways to deal with this
well, that estimate was off... by far :)
But given the goals of
- as high level of isolation of the client space from the linker
(respectively toolchain)
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 11:07:24PM +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1477354
Thanks for the info. We are seeing similar problems with the
pacemaker build on Debian now:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=869986
Guess we'll need to fix pacemaker libs to
On 31/07/17 21:55 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> This might be of interest *now* if you are fiddling with bleeding
> edge, or *later* when the distros adopt that version of binutils or
> newer: Root cause is currently unknown, but the good news is that
> the failure will be captured by the test
This might be of interest *now* if you are fiddling with bleeding
edge, or *later* when the distros adopt that version of binutils or
newer: Root cause is currently unknown, but the good news is that
the failure will be captured by the test suite. At least this was
the case with the recent mass
