Hi Hideo-san! On 2012-05-11 02:09, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: > Hi Raoul, > Hi Dejan, > > Thank you for the reflection to a repository. > > To Raoul : > The matter of the next email is still left. > Please tell your opinion. > * http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/dev/76409
I think the only patch left is postfix.patch.1121 from http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/dev/76532#76532 right? > diff -r aaf72a017c98 postfix > --- a/postfix Mon Nov 21 10:32:33 2011 +0900 > +++ b/postfix Mon Nov 21 10:34:08 2011 +0900 > @@ -264,7 +264,13 @@ > fi > > if ocf_is_true $status_support; then > - data_dir=`postconf $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR -h data_directory > 2>/dev/null` > + orig_data_dir=`postconf $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR -h data_directory > 2>/dev/null` > + data_dir=`echo $orig_data_dir | tr ',' ' '` > + dcount=`echo $data_dir | wc -w` > + if [ $dcount -gt 1 ]; then > + ocf_log err "Postfix data directory '$orig_data_dir' > cannot set plural parameters." > + return $OCF_ERR_PERM > + fi > if [ ! -d "$data_dir" ]; then > if ocf_is_probe; then > ocf_log info "Postfix data directory '$data_dir' not > readable during probe." i would slightly modify this: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - diff --git a/heartbeat/postfix b/heartbeat/postfix index 273d5c9..2f4ab13 100755 --- a/heartbeat/postfix +++ b/heartbeat/postfix @@ -264,6 +264,11 @@ postfix_validate_all() if ocf_is_true $status_support; then data_dir=`postconf $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR -h data_directory 2>/dev/null` + data_dir_count=`echo "$data_dir" | tr ',' ' ' | wc -w` + if [ $data_dir_count -gt 1 ]; then + ocf_log err "Postfix data directory '$orig_data_dir' cannot be set to multiple directories." + return $OCF_ERR_INSTALLED + fi if [ ! -d "$data_dir" ]; then if ocf_is_probe; then ocf_log info "Postfix data directory '$data_dir' not readable during probe." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - what do you think about that? > @@ -278,16 +284,14 @@ > # check directory permissions > if ocf_is_true $status_support; then > user=`postconf $OPTION_CONFIG_DIR -h mail_owner 2>/dev/null` > - for dir in "$data_dir"; do > - if ! su -s /bin/sh - $user -c "test -w $dir"; then > - if ocf_is_probe; then > - ocf_log info "Directory '$dir' is not writable by > user '$user' during probe." > - else > - ocf_log err "Directory '$dir' is not writable by > user '$user'." > - return $OCF_ERR_PERM; > - fi > + if ! su -s /bin/sh - $user -c "test -w $data_dir"; then > + if ocf_is_probe; then > + ocf_log info "Directory '$data_dir' is not writable by > user '$user' during probe." > + else > + ocf_log err "Directory '$data_dir' is not writable by > user '$user'." > + return $OCF_ERR_PERM; > fi > - done > + fi > fi > fi > As outlined, i see no benefit in removing the loop and would like to keep it in case we want to check some other directories in the future. quoting http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/dev/76453#76453 : >> the current loop: >>> for dir in "$data_dir"; do >>> ... >>> done >> (looping exactly one dir) >> >> could easily be enhanced to check more dirs, e.g.: >>> for dir in "$data_dir" "$data_dir/active" "$data_dir/incoming"; do >>> ... >>> done >> (looping three dirs) >> >> without having to re-introduce the loop. Cheers, Raoul -- ____________________________________________________________________ DI (FH) Raoul Bhatia M.Sc. email. r.bha...@ipax.at Technischer Leiter IPAX - Aloy Bhatia Hava OG web. http://www.ipax.at Barawitzkagasse 10/2/2/11 email. off...@ipax.at 1190 Wien tel. +43 1 3670030 FN 277995t HG Wien fax. +43 1 3670030 15 ____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
