I've pushed patch http://review.whamcloud.com/17593 to restore this tool to the tree, but I'm not even sure if it builds yet. If someone with a vested interest in using this tool could take over that patch, then it can land in a finite time, as I've never used it myself and have lots of other things to work on.
That means someone who knows how this tool is supposed to work needs to fix any compile problems, test it a bit manually, and make a short test in conf-sanity.sh that verifies it continues to work as expected in the future. I don't mind to carry this in the Lustre tree, so that it can be updated as things change (e.g. /proc to /sys conversion and such), but it needs at minimum a new test so that it doesn't silently break in the future. Cheers, Andreas On 2015/12/14, 09:08, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Scott Nolin" <lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org on behalf of scott.no...@ssec.wisc.edu> wrote: > >On 12/14/2015 12:43 AM, Dilger, Andreas wrote: >... >> Is this a tool that you are using? IIRC, there wasn't a particular >>reason >> that it was removed, except that when we asked LLNL (the authors) they >> said they were no longer using it, and we couldn't find anyone that was >> using it so it was removed in commit b5a7260ae8f along with a bunch of >> other old tools. > >Thanks for the reply, indeed we were using it. We don't use it daily, >but when doing some things it is really convenient. > >> >> If there is a demand for lshowmount I don't think it would be hard to >> reinstate. > > >If it makes more sense for it to be a separate tool outside the lustre >code base, that'd be fine too I think. > >Thanks, >Scott > > > Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Lustre Principal Architect Intel High Performance Data Division _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
