 |
 |
Yes, you can do that (i.e. put the xrd.protocol for xroot with the http declaration protected by 'if exec xrootd') but it's unnecessary as the xroot protocol will be loaded anyway. In fact, the test we are putting in will check if you are trying to override what is considered the "static" protocol with a conflicting name. Technically, the protocol is named "xroot" not "xrootd". Yes, the documentation is wrong and will be corrected. This was changed in R5 to end the confusion between protocol and the executable running the protocol. The protocol for xrootd is xroot and for cmsd is cms. That change made is possible to fall into the trap of double loads (that was an oversight on out part). Fortunately, almost no one specifies the default protocol in the config file. With our new patch we will warn about the discrepancy and simply ignore the directive; which is safe to do as it changes nothing. So, it's up to you but I would suggest just getting rid of it as it is unnecessary! .
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1