On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 10:22:00AM -0800, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 05:17:35PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote:
+%package daemon-plugin-lockd +Plugin for virtlockd +Requires: libvirt-libs = %{version}-%{release}
Maybe libvirt-daemon-lock-plugin-lockd? A bit verbose, but would help better differenciate it from other loadable drivers.
The other loadable drivers are in libvirt-dameon-driver-XXX packages, so IMHO it is already easily distinguished by being in a libvirt-daemon-plugin-XXX package. So lets keep it more concise as Jim has it named here.
Either way, we should take the existing libvirt-lock-sanlock package and convert it to the new naming convention for consistency.
Yes.
Both packages should depend on libvirt-daemon-lock too, instead of just the libraries.
Nope, they shouldn't - that's the virtlockd server, which is completely separate from these plugins.
+%files daemon-plugin-lockd +%dir %attr(0755, root, root) %{_libdir}/libvirt/lock-driver
I believe this directory belongs to either the libvirt-daemon-lock package (more likely) or possibly the libvirt-daemon-common package.
-- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
With 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 :|