Hi, I was able to get rc2 to build on FreeBSD. Here are the buildlogs for current release of FreeBSD (9): http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=... http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=...

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 07:50:43PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange thus spake: >On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:34:09AM -0700, Jason Helfman wrote: >>Hi, >>I was able to get rc2 to build on FreeBSD. >>Here are the buildlogs for current release of FreeBSD (9): >> >>http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=9-jgh_AMD64&id=1289 >>http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=9-jgh_I386&id=1289 > >Oooh, you have some interesting warnings there I've not seen before >with my GCC > >1357 conf/domain_conf.c: In function 'virDomainDiskDefParseXML': >1358 conf/domain_conf.c:3602: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1359 conf/domain_conf.c:3619: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1360 conf/domain_conf.c: In function 'virDomainFSDefParseXML': >1361 conf/domain_conf.c:4138: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1362 conf/domain_conf.c:4144: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1363 conf/domain_conf.c: In function 'virDomainDefParseXML': >1364 conf/domain_conf.c:7722: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1365 CC libvirt_conf_la-domain_audit.lo >1366 CC libvirt_conf_la-domain_nwfilter.lo >1367 CC libvirt_conf_la-domain_event.lo >1368 CC libvirt_conf_la-network_conf.lo >1369 conf/network_conf.c: In function 'virNetworkDefParseXML': >1370 conf/network_conf.c:957: warning: null format string [-Wformat] >1371 CC libvirt_conf_la-nwfilter_params.lo >1372 CC libvirt_conf_la-nwfilter_conf.lo >1373 CC libvirt_conf_la-node_device_conf.lo >1374 conf/node_device_conf.c: In function 'virNodeDeviceDefParseXML': >1375 conf/node_device_conf.c:1162: warning: null format string [-Wformat] > >...and quite a others of the same issue... > >What GCC version does FreeBSD 9 have ? gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD] Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > > > >Also more generally, any reason you don't enable the test suite: > >1755 ================================================================ >1756 ====================<phase 5: make test>==================== >1757 add_pkg >1758 make: don't know how to make regression-test(continuing) >1759 1 error >1760 ================================================================ How do I enable, and what requirements are this dependent on?

>I'd hope to should pass, and would be interested in any failures > > >More generally do you have plans to enable more of the hypervisor >drivers besides ESX, VMWare & VirtualBox ? In theory at least QEMU >and Xen are relevant to the FreeBSD. I was just looking into adding QEMU and Xen today. How can I enable these? It is asking for kernel-headers, but my guess is that this is already available through some of our ports. Any guidance on what it would the code would be looking for insofar as headers would be great so I can either find a port to supply it or port something to supply it.

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:48:11PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange thus spake: >>>>http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=9-jgh_AMD64&id=1289 >>>>http://lorie.secnap.net/tb/index.php?action=display_markup_log&build=9-jgh_I386&id=1289 > >The test suite doesn't depend on anything that the main code doesn't >already require. So you should be able to just run 'make check' and >it'll compile & run the tests. > >Of course reality may differ from theory :-) I've enabled testing, now, if you want to take a look at the above urls. Any comments? > >>>I'd hope to should pass, and would be interested in any failures Let me know if you would like to see anything more here. >>> >>> >I strongly expect that the QEMU driver has a large number of Linux-isms >in it. That said, I also expect all the Linux-isms to be solveable. So >my recommendation is probably to enable it, then insert enough #ifdef's >to get just the basics compiling. Then post the #ifdef details to the >list so we can figure out an optimal way to handle the Linux-isms long >term, and make suggestions on how to provide BSD alternative impls. > >The kernel-headers check is an example of a Linux-ism we should look >to solve. I agree with removing the Linux-ism's, as it will only make it more portable. Do you have an example of header files that I should be looking for?