[5575] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Renaming "afslocker" to "attach" for non-Athena OpenAFS 1.4.1
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathan D Reed)
Fri Aug 11 12:29:34 2006
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:29:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jonathan D Reed <jdreed@MIT.EDU>
To: William Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
cc: openafs-release@MIT.EDU, release-team@MIT.EDU,
Alex T Prengel <alexp@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <0e44596bbd4172caf96589e96b884f3f@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62L.0608111218200.22296@infinite-loop.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: 1.217
X-Spam-Level: * (1.217)
X-Spam-Flag: NO
I'll go with that method then.
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, William Cattey wrote:
> The traditional way to do this is to have a transition script that says,
> "This way of doing things is no longer recommended use X instead. The old way
> will stop working at event Y."
> The script then proceeds to behave normally.
>
> So I recommend we update the afslocker script to behave the same but print to
> the standard error output:
>
> With the OpenAFS 1.4.1 release, we offer "attach" as the replacement for
> afslocker.
> Please switch to using attach instead. The afslocker script will stop
> working at the
> next IS&T release of OpenAFS.
>
> -wdc
>
> "Like my father before me, I shall remain 5 years old till the day I die!"
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Jonathan Reed wrote:
>
>>
>> What do we want to do about machines which currently have 1.2 and
>> afslocker? As I see it, we have a few choices:
>>
>> 1) Leave afslocker where it is.
>> 2) Rename it and chmod a-x it
>> (which we currently do if it exists and is a file as opposed to a
>> symlink to the new version)
>> 3) Replace it with a script which says "this is not what you want"
>>
>> I vote for #2, and perhaps a stock answer:
>>
>> Q: I installed OpenAFS 1.4, and now I can't run afslocker?
>>
>> A: afslocker was renamed to "attach"
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> openafs-setup is a noarch RPM, so I can put out new builds while I'm away
>> next week.
>>
>> -Jon
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2006, at 9:21 AM, William Cattey wrote:
>>
>>> Below, jdreed makes a case for renaming the "afslocker" script we ship
>>> with non-Athena OpenAFS to "attach", and adding a "detach" script. The
>>> rationale is that our attach does most of what Athena attach does, and
>>> there is value to harmonizing the platforms.
>>>
>>> I have run this by Greg Hudson and he "sees no big pitfalls".
>>>
>>> I'm still hoping for a go-live of OpenAFS 1.4.1 for early next week. I
>>> THINK we can make this change and still go live then.
>>>
>>> Here is my inventory of what's needed:
>>>
>>> 1. Revise the installer (again).
>>> a. rename afslocker to attach
>>> b. add detach
>>> c. confirm installer still works after changes.
>>> d. confirm attach and detach function
>>> 2. Revise the detach stock answer.
>>> (http://itinfo.mit.edu/answer.php?id=7017) to say "Yes." or just delete
>>> it.
>>> 3. Revise the Install doc (http://itinfo.mit.edu/article.php?id=7297):
>>> rewrite penultimate bullet item to call it "attach" and say it is of
>>> similar functionality to "attach as provided by Athena".
>>> 4. Revise the Getting Started doc
>>> (http://itinfo.mit.edu/article.php?id=7754): rewrite section "Navigating
>>> and afslocker" to make attach canon.
>>> 5. Revise AFS at MIT: An Introduction
>>> (http://itinfo.mit.edu/article.php?id=6845):
>>> a. Change 4 instances of "attach or afslocker" to "attach"
>>> b. Rewrite Navigation Shortcuts to delete "afslocker" references and
>>> to detail any differences between Athena and non-Athena attach.
>>>
>>> Next steps:
>>>
>>> 1. Get sign-off from Bob Lang, Alex Prengel, and Heather Anne that doing
>>> this is OK.
>>> 2. Get sign-off from jdreed that the change can be made to the installer.
>>> 3. Milestone: change is made to the installer.
>>> 4. The other 4 revision tasks are done.
>>>
>>> Bob, Alex, Heather Anne: What say you?
>>>
>>> -wdc
>>>
>>> "Like my father before me, I shall remain 5 years old till the day I die!"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Reed wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is why I was wondering if we want to just call "afslocker" attach,
>>>> to eliminate confusion, since it now mostly does everything attach does.
>>>> I can easily add a "detach" command if we want one, which may be smarter
>>>> that telling people to remove the symlink (especially if they're stupid
>>>> and use a command which may follow the symlink and delete files in the
>>>> locker)
>>>
>>
>
>
