Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 3/4] travis: test upstart script handling on precise distro scenario

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 04:14:21PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 12:00 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com&gt; > > --- > > .travis.yml | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml > > index 41a293451c..0328fcb8f1 100644 > > --- a/.travis.yml > > +++ b/.travis.yml > > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ matrix: > > include: > > - compiler: gcc > > dist: precise > > + env: > > + - CONFIGURE_ARGS=--with-init-script=upstart > > Both precise and trusty use upstart, so there's no reason not > to apply this to both, especially if we're going trusty-only as > suggested earlier. Limiting it to the gcc build is rather strange > as well. The initscript handling code is only exercised if you run 'make install' and only the 'make distcheck' rule I added to precise will exercise 'make install'.

> Even macOS doesn't seem bothered by that at all, though it's kinda > nasty to install an upstart init script there. Not that it would > break anything, but it just feels wrong. We're not running 'make install' on macOS so its a no-op :-) > Perhaps we should improve our init system detection so that Ubuntu > releases older than 16.04 and CentOS 6 will automatically choose > upstart rather than passing this explicitly? The latter detects > init system "redhat", and frankly I'm not quite sure what that's > even supposed to be :) Even though RHEL-6 supports upstart, I'm fairly sure we always deployed RHEL-6 using traditional initscripts, not the upstart scripts. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list