Build System wrote :
New package GFS
GFS - The Global File System
New package GFS-kernel
GFS-kernel - The Global File System kernel modules
New package ccs
CCS - The Cluster Configuration System
New package cfengine
GNU cfengine - a systems administration tool for networks
New package cman
cman - The Cluster Manager
New package cman-kernel
cman-kernel - The Cluster Manager kernel modules
New package dlm
dlm - The Distributed Lock Manager
New package dlm-kernel
dlm-kernel - The Distributed Lock Manager kernel modules.
New package fence
fence - The cluster I/O fencing system
New package gnbd
gnbd - GFS's Network Block Device
New package gnbd-kernel
gnbd-kernel - The kernel module for GFS's Network Block Device
New package gulm
gulm - One possible lock manager for GFS
New package iddev
iddev is a library that identifies device contents.
New package lvm2-cluster
Cluster extenstions for userland logical volume management tools
New package magma
A cluster/lock manager API abstraction library
New package magma-plugins
Cluster manager plugins for magma
New package rgmanager
Open Source HA Resource Group Failover for Red Hat Enterprise Linux
(futile cosmetic rant below, you've been warned)
I really think repeating the name of a package in its summary, or its
license for that matter, is unneeded redundancy which reduces readability
when going through lists of packages (at install time for instance). In the
above, lots have the name pre-pended (short or long), and some have useless
"The", "A" etc.
When the time comes, I'd really favor a Fedora guideline that explains what
the "name", "summary" and "description" are each meant for,
and what they
should contain.
I am glad to notice though that there isn't a single trailing dot :-) D'oh,
I read too fast, there are two of them :-(
Matthias
--
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages :
http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 3 (Heidelberg) - Linux kernel 2.6.9-1.724_FC3
Load : 0.03 0.19 0.29