It's fixed on 4.2-forward branch, I tested it on my local machine already.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Weller [mailto:swel...@ena.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 3:25 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> We use CLVM in production today. I'm ok to apply a forward patch in our rpm
> builds if we need to, although I'm pretty sure CLVM is fairly widely deployed
> in organizations with fiber/iscsi SANs. I haven't had a chance to build the
> latest RC as of yet. I'll hopefully get that tested before midday Monday. I
> did
> start building the first RC, but packaging was still broken...then I got
> sidetracked.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Marcus Sorensen" <shadow...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, September 6, 2013 5:08:53 PM
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
>
> By the way, not sure if it was clear but the template download portion
> worked just fine.
> On Sep 6, 2013 3:45 PM, "Edison Su" <edison...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> > In order to support it, I need to manually, find a way to install
> > CLVM(find an ISCSI disk, create CLVM on it etc) in my Lab, a lot of
> > work to do.
> > Is it possible, I write some code, then have you help to test? I
> > almost finished the code.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 2:32 PM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> > >
> > > I don't use CLVM any more, and I have no idea how many people do.
> > > I'm relatively certain that some do, because of past questions/bug
> reports.
> > > Regardless, I don't think it should be decided based on someone's
> > > guess
> > at
> > > how many people it will impact, but instead on whether we are
> > > willing to
> > ship
> > > regressions for the sake of a time based release. If we had some
> > > hard
> > data it
> > > could be useful, but since we don't I think we have to assume the worst.
> > > On Sep 6, 2013 2:55 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 08:18:35PM +0000, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 10:21 AM
> > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (fourth round)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Animesh,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd ask that this vote stay open until EOD Monday. I've tested
> > > > > > the basic sig / artifact, but I want an opportunity to run it
> > > > > > in an actual environment before formally voting.
> > > > > [Animesh>] Sure I can keep the VOTE open until Monday.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also, there is an issue being raised by Marcus (that Edison
> > > > > > was going
> > > > to
> > > > > > look into) in another thread around the CPVM. Is this a
> > > > > > blocker
> > issue?
> > > > > [Animesh>]Edison is working on a fix and will put in 4.2-forward
> > branch.
> > > > I am not sure who else uses CLVM to access the broader impact, if
> > > > it is Marcus and he is fine with using Edison's fix in his
> > > > environment than not an issue.
> > > >
> > > > Ha... I thought it was around the cPvm, not cLvm.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I guess it's up to Marcus (and others) to vote accordingly
> > > > WRT there concern about this issue.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for holding off until EOD Monday for me (and perhaps
> > > > others) to vote!
> > > >
> > > > -chip
> > > >
> >
