On 05/29/2015 01:31 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 01.05.2015 20:56, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> Commit 198cc1d3 introduced libxl-lockd and libxl-sanlock config
> files but forgot to add them to the spec file. Follow-up commit
> 62b18d98 added the files to daemon-driver-libxl, but missed adding
> them to the daemon package when configuring libvirt
> --without-driver-modules. In addition, commit 62b18d98 added
> libxl-sanlock to daemon-driver-libxl, but it should be included
> in lock-sanlock when libvirt is configured --with-sanlock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig(a)suse.com>
> ---
>
> Given the problems I've caused with the original commit 198cc1d3,
> I'm reluctant to push this as a build-breaker without another
> set of eyes reviewing it.
>
> libvirt.spec.in | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/libvirt.spec.in b/libvirt.spec.in
> index f95e31f..0c343d6 100644
> --- a/libvirt.spec.in
> +++ b/libvirt.spec.in
> @@ -2007,6 +2007,7 @@ exit 0
> %endif
> %if %{with_libxl}
ACK and sorry for the delay.
No problem. But in the end I think I'll wait until after the release to push
this. I didn't test all the combinations (with/without sanlock, with/without
modules, etc) and don't particularly want the "broke rpm build badge" for
consecutive releases :-)
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2015-April/msg01590.html
Regards,
Jim