On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Whit Blauvelt <whit@...> wrote:
> Let me first off say I hugely appreciate Ganglia. In the old spirit of
> reporting glitches so others may benefit, I'd like to add this brief update
> to my earlier notes on installing on CentOS. This time it's a
> build-from-source install on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS server.
Thanks, and we appreciate your comments.
> cp mans/* /usr/share/man/man1
> cp gmond/gmond.conf.5 /usr/share/man/man5
This is being looked at -- by default manpages should be installed,
see this bug:
> cp gmond/gmond.init /etc/init.d/gmond
This is a bit tougher, since we'll need to write detection code to
figure out what OS you're running. Remember Ganglia is supported on
> mkdir /etc/ganglia
> cd gmond/modules
> cp -a conf.d /etc/ganglia
> rm /etc/ganglia/conf.d/example.conf
Again, you may not always want to copy all the configuration files as
not all modules are supported on all platforms. Perhaps a separate
`make install_gmond_modules` can be created for users who would want
to install them.
> cd /etc/ganglia
> gmond -t > gmond.conf
This is also being looked at.
> 3. If you'd like to see gmond segfault, after the "cp -a conf.d etc/ganglia"
> /step, but before the "gmond -t > gmond.conf" step, issue a
> "gmond -m". Now, since "gmond -t merely makes explicit the implicit gmond
> configuration settings, why should it segfault just if the module
> conf.d files are there when the gmond.conf isn't yet??
Please see this bug report:
> 4. Create an Ubuntu-style /etc/init.d/gmond file. This is left as something
> of an exercise for the reader. However, at then end here you'll find a
> stripped-down version that works for me - but beware it's inelegant and
> not rigorously tested.
You can probably just get the official one from Ubuntu/Debian.
> When I posted my prior notes to the CentOS list I got seriously flamed for
> building from tar rather than running through rpmbuild. I hope building from
> tar isn't effectively depricated, since in my experience it's always been
> the best way to be sure of getting the most recent version of a critical
> daemon right. My rule of thumb is to stay with distros for anything they've
> done well and are current enough with, and build-by-hand anything where
> their compile options or less-than-current version doesn't fit local needs.
> That's generally at most a few daemons on any particular system. I always
> leave the libraries and so on stock distro. The storm from some of my peers,
> who now regard this as an "inproper" method, surprised me.
Building from source is definitely not deprecated, since all packages
are based on it. However, the manual operations that you have
outlined above are usually taken care of by the packager, and thus are
hidden from end users on platforms where a binary package is
I understand that you're trying to install Ganglia on CentOS and
Ubuntu systems. For CentOS, I would suggest that you build the RPMs
from the tarball. The spec file is kept fairly up to date and you
don't need to go through any of the manual processes you have
mentioned. Additionally the package can then be tracked via RPM which
is probably what you want to do on a RPM-based system anyway.
For Ubuntu -- I don't see official packages for 3.1.7 but they are
available from Debian sid, so perhaps you can use those:
> So does my experience count as finding a bug which should be reported in the
> 3.1.7 makefile (not to mention that segfault), or is building from tar
> something the Ganglia maintainers feel should be discouraged? For most major
> projects it remains the most-supported installation path, as it has long
Please feel free to file bugs that you believe I have not addressed in
this email. We will continue to improve the "building from source"