Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E5CF910F03 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:37:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 1440 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jun 2013 07:37:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cloudstack-dev-archive@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 1386 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jun 2013 07:37:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 1377 invoked by uid 99); 14 Jun 2013 07:37:15 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:37:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rajesh.battala@citrix.com designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender) Received: from [203.166.19.134] (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM.AU) (203.166.19.134) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:37:10 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,864,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="3150366" Received: from sinpex01cl02.citrite.net ([10.151.46.33]) by SYDPIPO01.CITRIX.COM.AU with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 14 Jun 2013 07:36:48 +0000 Received: from SINPEX01CL01.citrite.net ([169.254.1.17]) by SINPEX01CL02.citrite.net ([169.254.2.33]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:36:46 +0800 From: Rajesh Battala To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" Subject: RE: Regarding ssvm-check script Thread-Topic: Regarding ssvm-check script Thread-Index: Ac5oWNpVfjsqCXTRTd+GSC7Yy1XHzQAW/o+AAAcxscA= Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:36:46 +0000 Message-ID: <8CCE9859D2CAFD45948DBF7145AFB98C0F22AE@SINPEX01CL01.citrite.net> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.144.6.32] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Nitin,=20 Yes, the ssvm under console proxy should be removed. It make more sense for= the script to be coming from secondary-storage folder path.=20 If you are removing the script under consoleproxy, make the change in the s= ystemvm-description.xml to pick the ssvm script from the secondary storage = scripts.=20 If you don't make that change systemvm.iso might not have the ssvm script. Thanks Rajesh Battala > -----Original Message----- > From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 12:09 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: Regarding ssvm-check script >=20 > Hi Rajesh, > Please find my comments inline >=20 > On 13/06/13 10:40 PM, "Rajesh Battala" wrote: >=20 > >Hi All, > >While fixing an issue ( https://reviews.apache.org/r/11862/ )in > >ssvm-check script I figured out some issues. > > > >1.There are two ssvm_check scripts(duplicates). > > > >./services/console-proxy/server/scripts/ssvm-check.sh > >./services/secondary-storage/scripts/ssvm-check.sh > > > >When building the code, these scripts will go to systemvm.zip, > >systemvm.zip will be packaged into systemvm.iso. > > > >systemvm-descriptor.xml will define what all the scripts should package. > >As per the descriptor xml, the ssvm-check script under console-proxy > >is getting into systemvm.zip. >=20 > Shouldn't it be the other way round ? I mean the ssvm script under > secondary-storage should have come in ? >=20 > > > >I had verified the ssvm-check script with the fix under console-proxy. > >The systemvm.zip is getting update properly and making into systemvm.iso= . > >And ssvm is getting the right script now. > > > >Changes made in script under > >./services/secondary-storage/scripts/ssvm-check.sh is not getting into > >systemvm.iso > > > >I feel the script is redundant and creating confusion. > >Can we remove the script in one location? >=20 > I would remove it from console-proxy for the sake of consistency and make > sure the one under secondary-storage gets in. Also while doing so hopeful= ly > the final location (folder structure) of the script is not disturbed in t= he ssvm >=20 > > > >Thanks > >Rajesh Battala