From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC1781FF183 for ; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:13:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B9448E62A; Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:14:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <2367bf22-edcf-4798-8acd-8cd8dd91e4c6@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 15:14:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox Backup Server development discussion References: <20250729165655.681368-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> <20250729165655.681368-9-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.703 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-network-interface-pinning 1/1] initial commit X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" On 7/30/25 3:07 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 29.07.25 um 18:57 schrieb Stefan Hanreich: >> + // This is run on a PVE host, so we use the PVE-specific pinning tool instead with the >> + // parameters supplied. >> + if std::fs::exists("/usr/bin/proxmox-network-interface-pinning")? { > > Hmm, why does this here live in libexec if it's intended to be the main one? > > Should we rather move the one from pve-manager into libexec with a product > specific name like "pve-network-interface-pinning" and keep this here in > bin with the generic name? As otherwise one needs to use the full libexec > path when using this on PBS/PMG/PDM? Or what's the idea here? Yes, that sounds better, so the pve-manager one into /usr/libexec/proxmox/pve-network-interface-pinning and this one into /usr/bin/proxmox-network-interface-pinning Or even sbin? I assume, we would then install the standalone package by default in PVE? > btw. no need to commit Cargo.lock here, at least not for initial commit > to the list. duly noted _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel