[GE users] Proposal for an improvement in script inst_sge

Marco Donauer Marco.Donauer at Sun.COM
Tue Jan 25 13:15:59 GMT 2005


but the configuration is always the same.
Making a qconf -mconf I always got the same entries, concerning the afs mode
and the bootstrap file has the same security_mode entry for both install 
option orders. (inst_sge -m -afs / inst_sge -afs -m)
So I can't reproduce what varibales are overwritten during the argument 


Wolfgang Friebel wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Marco Donauer wrote:
>> Wolfgang,
>> I had alook on you Issue, concerning the argument order.
>> Does the install script fail, so I mean does it exit or is the 
>> behaviour of gridengine wrong?
>> I made a test and the installation script runs with -m -afs and -afs -m
>> What is the entry within your bootstrap file? There should be a 
>> product_mode is it set to afs?
> Hi Marco,
> the script itself is working both ways. Unfortunately it does produce 
> wrong results with the wrong ordering of arguments. Of course I have 
> set the product_mode to AFS. And I verified that it does indeed work 
> if used properly.
> As I did write the problem is that in the ARGS processing loop you do 
> source other files which themselves may set variables that are needed 
> later on. This IS the case for AFS and might be a problem for further
> combinations of switches. Therefore my proposal:
>> The first loop should process those arguments that do only influence
>> Variables (like -bup -rst -afs etc.).
>> The second loop should process those arguments that do depend on 
>> variables
>> which might have been altered in the first loop. That is especially the
>> case for the -m switch, but also others might be affected.
> Best regards

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help at gridengine.sunsource.net

More information about the gridengine-users mailing list