Re: [libvirt] RFC: Post-install behavior of libvirt(-client)
On 02/20/2012 06:55 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 02/14/2012 03:17 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/14/2012 01:37 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I have a small bug #786770 [1] assigned and I discussed this with few
>> people from our team but I'm still not sure what should be the proper
>> fix for this bug.
>
> with a similar wording for systemd:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd
>
>>> Why don't we....
>>>
>>> Start the service after installation?
>>>
>>> Installations can be in changeroots, in an installer context, or in other
situations where you don't want the services autostarted.
>
> libvirtd is network-listening, libvirt-guests is not; but libvirt-guests
> without libvirtd isn't quite as useful.
>
> I'm starting to lean towards option 1 - we should install, but not
> start, services.
Another wrinkle to the question:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Starting_services_by_default
documents that services must not be enabled by default if it is
network-enabled, unless it has FESCo approval. libvirtd is
network-enabled, since it can be configured to accept connections from
the outside world; but its default configuration is useful without
network configuration. Likewise, libvirt-guests is primarily useful for
only local guests, but it can be argued that since it can connect to
hypervisors over a network, it is network-enabled. Do we need to apply
for FESCo exception on either of these two services?
To me it seems more reasonable to just don't start anything. I don't
want any service on my system started just because I installed it. I
know it's not the same, but there are some cases where I'm sure others
wouldn't like that too. For example when you just want the development
libraries or when you remotely install some firewall that could cut you
out of the connected machine.
Having libvirt-guests set remotely is not very common I guess. If you
have a vm running somewhere else you most probably don't want to have it
saved when shutting down your computer. Maybe that's another case when
you don't want to have it started. I think services should be started
only when the user went through the configuration and knows he wants to
have them started. I know I seem very stubborn in this decision but
unless proved otherwise I have no reason to change my mind about
removing these parts of the script but if anyone has anything to add to
this I will very warmly welcome any other views.
I'm not talking about enabling, that's something else. For this I think
it can be left as is as default configuration is only local for all
installed services (am I right?).
So to summarize it. Please tell me if I can remove the parts of the
%post script dealing with starting services. If not, please let me know
as well, because then I have a patch prepared that only (without any
functional change) fixes the bug that originally led me to this discussion.
All criticism appreciated ;-)
Regards,
Martin