[Pacemaker] impossible to find againpacemaker-1.0.5-4.2-x86_64on internet

[E-Blokos]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrew Beekhof" <andrew at beekhof.net>
To: <pacemaker at clusterlabs.org>
Cc: <pacemaker at clusterlabs.org>
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] impossible to find 
againpacemaker-1.0.5-4.2-x86_64on internet


> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:29 AM, E-Blokos <infos at e-blokos.com> wrote:
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Beekhof" <andrew at beekhof.net>
>> To: <pacemaker at clusterlabs.org>
>> Cc: <pacemaker at clusterlabs.org>
>> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:43 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] impossible to find again
>> pacemaker-1.0.5-4.2-x86_64on internet
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 6:52 AM, E-Blokos <infos at e-blokos.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> on all mirrors, example
>>>
>>>
>>> http://mirror.etf.bg.ac.yu/opensuse/repositories/server:/ha-clustering/openSUSE_11.1/x86_64/
>>>
>>> htere are all rpm BUT pacemaker-1.0.5-4.2-x86_64, why ?
>>>
>>> I really need it to make my node to work again.
>>
>> Then you really should have made some backups.
>> Try a more recent version from http://clusterlabs.org/rpm
>>
>>>
>>> Thank you very much
>>>
>>> Franck
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> You right Andrew, next time will make a special backup. (of the whole 
>> HD?)
>> for now I'm trying to copy by hand all related files from another node
>
> rpm -ql pacemaker pacemaker-libs is probably a good start
> other than that, i cant help
>
>> to
>> the destroyed one
>> I tried other more recent version and all failed.
>
> In what way?
>


different ways, 1.0.6 install conflict with /etc/ha.d/shellfunc, even 
deleted it stays the error.
1.0.7 openais changed completly the config (openais to corosync etc..) so I 
don't want to reconfigure all the cluster
only because of an minor update. Also why the old version of pacemaker are 
not accessible anymore ?
I'm sorry tbut no all people can follow the speed and hidden changes of 
updates

thanks

Franck 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.