On 04/27/2016 07:15 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:

Andrea Bolognani wrote:

...

On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 10:52 +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:

...

[...] someone should look at a potential FreeBSD portability issue based on the report (or that could be that the Jenkins test need a bit of attention)

I believe the libvirt-freebsd Jenkins job has been phased out in favor of adding the FreeBSD build slave to the same libvirt-daemon-build job used for Linux builds.

The downstream libvirt-daemon-syntax-check and libvirt-daemon-check don't seem to have been updated to reflect this change yet, nor have the libvirt-freebsd and libvirt-freebsd-daemon-check jobs been removed.

CCing Suren and Roman so they can give their take on the matter, but I'm fairly confident FreeBSD is doing just fine :) Yeah, I'm not having any issues on FreeBSD so far, so I assume these issues are related to Jenkins configuration.

However, there's at least one thing that's currently broken: the new peer address feature, when running with ifconfig, uses Linux specific syntax and in terms of peer address FreeBSD's ifconfig behaves differently. I haven't started working on the fix so far. :(

It is broken in other ways as well. I have a few patches for it that I need to send. (For your problem, since the bhve driver doesn't support setting the peer, I guess for now you could just log an error if peer was set.) But beyond that I think that "peer" may not be the best name for the new attribute. The way it was added, the new attribute would indeed be placed in the "peer" field of the netlink request for setting the IP address, but in the case of qemu this was only because address and peer were mixed up (see my mail about it from yesterday: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-April/msg01663.html That this mixup was able to get into the code implies that the name "peer" is uninformative at best, and could be confusing ("peer" from who's point of view?). I suggested that it be named "host" or "hostAddress", but haven't gotten any upvotes so far. Can anyone come up with a better name? (Basically if you have <ip address='A' peer='B'/>, then "A" is the IP address of the guest, and "B" is the IP address of the host-end of that interface; for lxc veth interfaces, it does end up that "address" is put in the address field and "peer" in the peer field, but for qemu it's exactly the opposite.) If we are going to change it, it must be now before the first release containing the new functionality. (I suppose as long as it was *heavily* documented that the "peer" was from the point of view of the guest, that name would be okay; something more self-documenting would lead to less confusion though).

On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 15:37 +0200, Guido Günther wrote:

  I'm seeing a broken archive

    $ tar zxf ../libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz 

    gzip: stdin: unexpected end of file     tar: Unexpected EOF in archive     tar: Unexpected EOF in archive     tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now

with

    c1d9602b5bb05e67f13ac141e3e987540467c632  ../libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz

even after fetching the file again. Could anybody else check?

Same here, even though the checksum is different. The previous release archive weighs in at 29MB while this one is just 9.3MB, so I guess the upload was interrupted. -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 03:37:47PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:52:35AM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:

...

We are in freeze ! I tagged the release candidate 1 in git and pushed signed tarball and rpms to the usual place:

ftp://libvirt.org/libvirt/

that looks fine with my very limited testing, but that's likely not indicative of the actual stability :) https://ci.centos.org/view/libvirt-project/ is rather positive though someone should look at a potential FreeBSD portability issue based on the report (or that could be that the Jenkins test need a bit of attention)

Plan is to have RC2 on Friday and try to push 1.3.4 final from airport in Sunday (so there is a little bit of risk there).

Please give it a try !

I'm seeing a broken archive

$ tar zxf ../libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz

gzip: stdin: unexpected end of file tar: Unexpected EOF in archive tar: Unexpected EOF in archive tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now

with

c1d9602b5bb05e67f13ac141e3e987540467c632 ../libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz

even after fetching the file again. Could anybody else check? cheers,

Hum, locally: thinkpad2:~/libvirt -> md5sum libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz ce794c9344ea96d119e2c1a0c71775fa libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz thinkpad2:~/libvirt -> on server [root@libvirt libvirt]# md5sum libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz 2c6d51a95b09678744c21b883789e666 libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz [root@libvirt libvirt]# argh ... rsync -avP to clean up the mess and [root@libvirt libvirt]# md5sum libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz ce794c9344ea96d119e2c1a0c71775fa libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz root@libvirt libvirt]# gpg --verify libvirt-1.3.4-rc1.tar.gz.asc gpg: Signature made Wed 27 Apr 2016 03:36:37 AM CEST using DSA key ID DE95BC1F gpg: Good signature from "Daniel Veillard (Red Hat work email) <veillard@redhat.com>" gpg: aka "Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@w3.org>" gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. Primary key fingerprint: C744 15BA 7C9C 7F78 F02E 1DC3 4606 B8A5 DE95 BC1F [root@libvirt libvirt]# should be all setC :-) thanks for reporting this Guido ! Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat veillard@redhat.com | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/