RE: Failover in copy...

[Wheeler, John]

think this is in 2.1.7?

http://www.cfengine.org/src-mirror/ChangeLog.txt

search for server.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: help-cfengine-bounces+jwheeler=eb.com@gnu.org
[mailto:help-cfengine-
> bounces+jwheeler=eb.com@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Chip Seraphine
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 12:34 PM
> To: Christian Pearce; help-cfengine@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Failover in copy...
> 
> On Thursday 16 September 2004 11:59, Christian Pearce wrote:
> > I know I talked about this before.  But isn't this just the inverse
of
> > define?  If the copy failed the define class wouldn't be set and the
> > failover would.  If the copy was successful just the opposite.
Isn't
> > this redundant?  All you have to do is ! the class and you have the
> > other condition.  Is there something about failover that I am
missing?
> 
> Order of operations.  Does "!copygood" mean that the copy in question
has
> not
> run yet, or that it failed?
> 
> > I think it might be of interest to have it try a second IP address.
So
> > the server would take comma separated values.
> 
> That would be extremely, massively cool.  I would recommend following
the
> iterator conventions rather than introducing a new one, however.
> 
> --
> 
> Chip Seraphine
> Unix Administrator
> TradeLink, LLC
> 312-264-2048
> chip@trdlnk.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Help-cfengine mailing list
> Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine