[Pacemaker] pcs equivalent of crm configure erase

[Andrew Beekhof]

On 19/04/2013, at 8:18 PM, emmanuel segura <emi2fast at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't know why redhat doesn't give to the users the alternatives to use what they want

Because they'd have to support both options which means double the engineering + QE effort.
More actually because people would end up using both and there would surely be subtle interaction issues.

> 
> sorry for my ugly english :-)
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 2013/4/19 T. <nospam at godawa.de>
> Hi Chris,
> 
> > No, you're definitely not missing anything.  The 'pcs cluster cib'
> > output isn't pretty.
> why there is an approach to build a new config-tool at all?
> 
> Why not use the crmsh? Why it was dropped in the RHEL-build?
> Does it have some relevant disadvantages?
> --
> To Answer please replace "invalid" with "de" !
> Zum Antworten bitte "invalid" durch "de" ersetzen !
> 
> 
> Chau y hasta luego,
> 
> Thorolf
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> 
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> esta es mi vida e me la vivo hasta que dios quiera
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> 
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org