On 11/7/22 04:32, Jiri Denemark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 10:09:31 -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote:
> On 11/4/22 09:22, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:24:18PM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
>>> The libvirt-daemon subpackage contains libvirt-guests.sh script (used by
>>> libvirt-guests service), which requires virsh to actually work. But
>>> since dynamic libraries were separated from libvirt-client to
>>> libvirt-libs more than 6 years ago, libvirt-daemon no longer requires
>>> virsh to be installed. So unless libvirt-client is explicitly installed
>>> (either manually or by installing the libvirt meta package),
>>> libvirt-guests will not work.
>>>
>>> Just adding libvirt-client as a dependency of libvirt-daemon would go
>>> against the original idea behind splitting libvirt-client: users may not
>>> want to install or use any client binaries on the host where the daemon
>>> runs (either they just use various language bindings or access the
>>> daemon remotely). To solve this we could possibly turn libvirt-daemon
>>> into an empty package and separate the daemons and libvirt-guests into
>>> subpackages to make sure we support both use cases, but marking
>>> libvirt-client as Recommended for libvirt-daemon does the same job in a
>>> much simpler way.
>>>
>>
>> Or you could just move the libvirt-guests files to libvirt-client
>> package since they couldn't work without it anyway.
>
> This actually seems like a better approach, especially in the context of modular
> daemons.
I think installing system services as part of libvirt-client is even
stranger than requiring libvirt-client as a dependency of the daemon
package.
Nod. Neither is a good solution.
It would make more sense to split the daemon package, separate the
monolithic daemon, proxy, and libvirt-guests so that one can only
install the parts that are actually needed when using modular daemons,
I've taken an initial stab at that
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2022-November/235924.html
but I think it's quite an overkill for several reasons. First,
the
monolithic daemon is supposed to completely disappear at some point.
In the meantime they could coexist a bit nicer with something like the above.
And the ancient libvirt-guests service should really be replaced by
a
solution implemented by the daemons themselves. And not only because the
libvirt-guests service may cause a modular daemon to be started when a
host is being shut down in case no domain is running.
Agreed, but IMO this is a separate problem to solve.
Regards,
Jim