Re: [libvirt] [Users] libvirt migration port configuration and virPortAllocator
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:26:23AM +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
Hello, following the bugzilla here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
we have " This is now fixed by v1.1.3-188-g0196845 and v1.1.3-189-ge3ef20d "
Does this mean that f19 that has libvirt-1.0.5.8-1.fc19.x86_64 is out? Any time soon to update it? I see at http://libvirt.org/sources/ files such as libvirt-1.1.4-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm since beginning of November... any particular reason for no packages neither in updates-testing repo?
Also, Fedora 20 has libvirt-1.1.3.2-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm Did it receive the patch update? I see nothing particular in its changelog...
I suspect that you'd see this bugfix only on libvirt>=1.2, but the best place for such questions is the libvirt mailing list (CCed). Unfortunately, that version is not even on virt-preview http://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virt-preview/fedora-19 (but it is on http://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virt-preview/fedora-20 !) Dan.
On 01/08/2014 02:45 AM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:26:23AM +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
Hello, following the bugzilla here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
This bug was tagged against upstream libvirt. If you need it backported to specific Fedora releases, it might be worth cloning the BZ and making sure the clone is against Fedora instead of Virtualization Tools.
we have " This is now fixed by v1.1.3-188-g0196845 and v1.1.3-189-ge3ef20d "
Does this mean that f19 that has libvirt-1.0.5.8-1.fc19.x86_64 is out?
We can backport the patch to v1.0.5-maint if there is a compelling reason (such as a BZ).
Any time soon to update it?
Fedora 19 and 20 will be betting a new build for CVE fixes anyways (there's at least four CVEs found during December, some still under embargo, and where the maintenance releases will probably be coordinated with the 1.2.1 upstream release around Jan 15).
I see at http://libvirt.org/sources/ files such as libvirt-1.1.4-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm
That's from fedora-virt-preview, but we only maintain fedora-virt-preview for a single release (that is, F19's virt-preview is no longer getting any updates now that F20 is stable, and F20's virt-preview is tracking what is in rawhide). At this point, if you want anything else fixed in F19, the fix has to go in 1.0.5.x, and you'll have to use the Fedora repo rather than the fedora-virt-preview repo.
since beginning of November... any particular reason for no packages neither in updates-testing repo?
Also, Fedora 20 has libvirt-1.1.3.2-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm Did it receive the patch update? I see nothing particular in its changelog...
I suspect that you'd see this bugfix only on libvirt>=1.2, but the best place for such questions is the libvirt mailing list (CCed). Unfortunately, that version is not even on virt-preview http://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virt-preview/fedora-19 (but it is on http://fedorapeople.org/groups/virt/virt-preview/fedora-20 !)
Again, virt-preview on F19 is dead. virt-preview on F20 tracks rawhide. And for the non-virt-preview packages, if you need particular patched backported to currently-maintained Fedora releases, bugzilla is the best place to make sure the request isn't lost. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
On 01/08/2014 05:48 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/08/2014 02:45 AM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:26:23AM +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
Hello, following the bugzilla here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
This bug was tagged against upstream libvirt. If you need it backported to specific Fedora releases, it might be worth cloning the BZ and making sure the clone is against Fedora instead of Virtualization Tools.
we have " This is now fixed by v1.1.3-188-g0196845 and v1.1.3-189-ge3ef20d "
Does this mean that f19 that has libvirt-1.0.5.8-1.fc19.x86_64 is out?
We can backport the patch to v1.0.5-maint if there is a compelling reason (such as a BZ).
I found the BZ and backported the patches to v1.0.5-maint: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018530 I will do v1.1.3-maint as well. Jan
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Ján Tomko wrote:
On 01/08/2014 05:48 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/08/2014 02:45 AM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:26:23AM +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
Hello, following the bugzilla here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1019053
This bug was tagged against upstream libvirt. If you need it backported to specific Fedora releases, it might be worth cloning the BZ and making sure the clone is against Fedora instead of Virtualization Tools.
we have " This is now fixed by v1.1.3-188-g0196845 and v1.1.3-189-ge3ef20d "
Does this mean that f19 that has libvirt-1.0.5.8-1.fc19.x86_64 is out?
We can backport the patch to v1.0.5-maint if there is a compelling reason (such as a BZ).
I found the BZ and backported the patches to v1.0.5-maint: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018530
I will do v1.1.3-maint as well.
Jan
As it was released to updates-testing, I tested and gave positive feedback for your backport to v1.0.5-maint https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018530 Successfully tested also the capability to automatically change tcp port if busy without giving error messages in webadmin gui Thanks! BTW with gluster 3.4.2-1, already pushed in f19 stable we have now also there the possibility to put port range (skip if busy capability was already there before), putting for example inside /etc/glusterfs/glusterd.vol option base-port 50152 Gianluca
Hi, any chance this also gets backported to EL 6 ? I would open a BZ, but just if it's technically possible. The version difference is quite huge. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Sven Kieske Systemadministrator Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG Königsberger Straße 6 32339 Espelkamp T: +49-5772-293-100 F: +49-5772-293-333 https://www.mittwald.de Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Sven Kieske wrote:
Hi,
any chance this also gets backported to EL 6 ?
I would open a BZ, but just if it's technically possible. The version difference is quite huge.
The bug for RH EL 6 has been already opened as a clone some months ago: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018695 You can eventually "stress" there for a resolution... Gianluca
participants (5)
-
Dan Kenigsberg -
Eric Blake -
Gianluca Cecchi -
Ján Tomko -
Sven Kieske