On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 04:43:18PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Tue, 2018-02-27 at 15:19 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > 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'.
That changes with patch 4/4, where you introduce a call to 'make
install' in the global script.
Either way, there's no downside in having the definition in the
global environment, as it makes everything tidier and easier to
reason about.
> > 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 :-)
Yes we are, at least as of patch 4/4.
> > 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.
So we have on Ubuntu, apparently.
While upstream libvirt may be installing init scripts on Ubuntu, their
own dpkg setup will use the upstart scripts :-) That is something we
could usefully fix though.
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 :|