[Nagiosplug-devel] Integrating Nagios::Plugininto the distribution
Gavin Carr
gavin at openfusion.com.au
Mon May 14 06:01:13 CEST 2007
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 09:46:12AM +0100, Ton Voon wrote:
> Looking back across this thread, I think almost everyone agrees we
> have to support installing N::P in a nagios dir for simple
> installation (as Matthias points out), and for sites which do not
> allow changes to system perl dirs (as John points out).
>
> The only dissenting opinion is from Gavin, because of duplication of
> N::P (local v system dirs) and making a deployment decision within
> code (by using FindBin).
>
> I'm not sure how to overcome the duplication, though a well managed
> system will have one or the other. If we clearly say a plugin prefers
> a local dir if it is there, that should make it clear which module is
> being used.
>
> The FindBin objection is hard to overcome too. Using PERL5LIB means
> more work for the user, setting up in various places (nagios user's
> profile on all monitored boxes, NRPE and Nagios start up scripts) - I
> can envisage more support calls coming from this decision. I'm not
> entirely convinced that using FindBin is that bad either - I think it
> is equivalent to using LD_RUN_PATH, which some Solaris people use to
> link to openssl (though admittedly, this is a decision they make at
> compile time, not always in the code at execution time). I guess we
> could have an option to strip out the "use lib" lines from the
> plugins at make time - would that be sufficient?
I guess so. Though adding the code in if you're using local perl modules
seems cleaner. Maybe we just have something like this in the plugins:
# use lib '/path/to/local/lib';
and uncomment and munge the lib path at install time? Is there benefit
from doing a FindBin rather than just setting it lib outright?
(Developers can just set PERL5LIB in their environments after all ...)
> I agree with Thomas that we always install N::P locally, though we
> provide configure switches to turn off.
>
> Is it fair to say we should proceed with the current plan?
Sounds like it.
>
> BTW, I saw a link to http://search.cpan.org/~adamk/Module-
> Install-0.65/lib/Module/Install/Bundle.pm which looks like it could
> provide the answer to the nanocpan idea - we create a bundle called
> Bundle::Nagios::Plugin which contains all the dependencies.
Yes, the Module::Install stuff looks good, assuming we can point the
install at a non-standard-lib install location.
Cheers,
Gavin
More information about the Devel
mailing list