Re: environment variables

[Martin Pala]

Christian Hopp wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Jun 2003, Martin Pala wrote:
>
>  
>
> > I think it will be usefull to extend execution environment list (in spawn.c) by:
> >
> > MONIT_EVENT
> > MONIT_SERVICE
> >
> > and
> >
> > MONIT_ACTION (will be described in the proposal)
> >
> >
> > What do you think?
> >    
>
> * Event?  It is the "method" like "start", "stop"...?
We discussed the general event driven model, where all events were 
mapped by default to method names, but later we "slowed down". Present 
event is subset of proposed model and it is choice of (alert.c):

#define DO_TIMEOUT   0
#define DO_RESTART   1
#define DO_CHECKSUM  2
#define DO_RESOURCE  3
#define DO_STOP      4
#define DO_FAILED    5
#define DO_TIMESTAMP 6

It could be, that the implementation will be close to the original 
proposal (which wasn't very realistic because of development resources) 
and events will comprise all "events" (like 'start', etc.) - we will see :)

> * What about MONIT_REPORT... the message generated for the mail?
I'm more inclined to give the application in environment only 
informations which will be needed. Application then could create the 
same message itself (monit's report contains just compilation of the 
same information with lot of 'user-friendly' words - i think it is not 
needed to give complete form of the message to method).

> In case service is a device or filesystem, we need MONIT_FS_FREE,
> MONIT_INODE_FREE,...
Agree

> Generally: +1
>
> CHopp
>
>
>