Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update packaging #1385

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 14, 2016
Merged

Update packaging #1385

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 14, 2016

Conversation

tsg
Copy link
Contributor

@tsg tsg commented Apr 13, 2016

This adjusts the paths for DEB and RPM according to the layout set in #1371, using a layout as close as possible as the one used by Elasticsearch.

Also fixes a gem install issue for fpm 1.5.

Tudor Golubenco added 2 commits April 13, 2016 13:23
* Follows the layout as defined in elastic#1371, setting path.home, path.config
  and path.data
* This removes the need to adjust the configuration file
@tsg
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsg commented Apr 13, 2016

Custom configuration file sedding is no longer needed for the template and the registry file in filebeat. \o/

@tsg tsg added the review label Apr 13, 2016
@tsg tsg mentioned this pull request Apr 13, 2016
14 tasks
- Add scripts for managing the dashboards of a single Beat {pull}1359[1359]
- On DEB/RPM installations, the binary files are now found under `/usr/share/{{beat_name}}/bin`, not in `/usr/bin`. {pull}1385[1385]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we symlink the binary? Will that cause problems?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Symlinking might be confusing because without the correct -path.* parameters the Beats might behave quite different. An alternative idea is to have, say, a filebeat.sh that runs filebeat with the right parameters in foreground. Not sure how helpful that would be.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I added that as a TODO in #1371, I'd prefer getting this one in quicker so we can test it with the nightlies.

@andrewkroh
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@andrewkroh andrewkroh merged commit 3e06053 into elastic:master Apr 14, 2016
@tsg tsg deleted the update_packaging branch August 25, 2016 10:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants