[Pacemaker] Low cost stonith device

[Johan Verrept]

On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 12:50 +0200, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:

> Well, if we already have the option to use port-nodename mapping,
> that should be preferable to increasing the configuration size.
> Still, perhaps you could add a hostlist parameter like in most
> stonith plugins. Then just use that instead of trying to guess
> the right node name.

I can do that, but it will still *work* the same. Ie, you still have to
assign the short hostname as port label and the RA still has to shorten
the name you give to resolve the name to a port. This is less likely to
go wrong though.
It seemed a better idea to actually get the supported names from device
because that way, it would be easier to debug problems (at least for ppl
that can run gethosts).

So before I spam the mailinglist with more versions: I introduce a
hostlist parameter to return the gethosts and then, to actually find the
device, I cut the hostname after the first dot and use that as label for
the ports.

	J.