Niko Tyni <nt...@debian.org> writes: > So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as > discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker > package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker > would be broken by the libdlm update?
No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package. I'm already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they can be uploaded. Both will go through NEW though, so it will take some time. Then LVM will have to be rebuilt against the new DLM, and you will be free to kick redhat-cluster out of the archive (I hope nothing else depends on it). Actually, it would be possible to temporarily omit Pacemaker support from DLM, but I'd like to avoid that if possible. -- Regards, Feri.