[libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/ * libvirt.spec.in: Disable libxl on Fedora < 16 --- libvirt.spec.in | 5 +++++ 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/libvirt.spec.in b/libvirt.spec.in index 988ea4e..4a62c80 100644 --- a/libvirt.spec.in +++ b/libvirt.spec.in @@ -133,6 +133,11 @@ %endif %endif +# Fedora doesn't have new enough Xen for libxl until F16 +%if 0%{?fedora} < 16 +%define with_libxl 0 +%endif + # PolicyKit was introduced in Fedora 8 / RHEL-6 or newer %if 0%{?fedora} >= 8 || 0%{?rhel} >= 6 %define with_polkit 0%{!?_without_polkit:1} -- 1.7.4
On 03/18/2011 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16
Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/
* libvirt.spec.in: Disable libxl on Fedora < 16 --- libvirt.spec.in | 5 +++++ 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libvirt.spec.in b/libvirt.spec.in index 988ea4e..4a62c80 100644 --- a/libvirt.spec.in +++ b/libvirt.spec.in @@ -133,6 +133,11 @@ %endif %endif
+# Fedora doesn't have new enough Xen for libxl until F16 +%if 0%{?fedora} < 16 +%define with_libxl 0 +%endif
ACK to the code change (modulo the value), but don't push until you have your answer from Jim or someone else regarding the right value. -- Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16
Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/
Xen 4.0.x contains some "tech preview" libxenlight bits, but it is buggy and missing quite a bit of functionality. Xen 4.1.0 is the first release with a usable libxenlight IMO. Also, the API changed quite a bit between Xen 4.0 and 4.1 and I have not attempted to make the libxl driver work with the preview libxenlight. Regards, Jim
On 03/18/2011 11:36 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16
Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/
Xen 4.0.x contains some "tech preview" libxenlight bits, but it is buggy and missing quite a bit of functionality. Xen 4.1.0 is the first release with a usable libxenlight IMO. Also, the API changed quite a bit between Xen 4.0 and 4.1 and I have not attempted to make the libxl driver work with the preview libxenlight.
Can we enhance the configure test (when there is no explicit --with-libxl) to reject the 4.0.x library, by requiring linking with a function that only exists in 4.1? -- Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/18/2011 11:36 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16
Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/
Xen 4.0.x contains some "tech preview" libxenlight bits, but it is buggy and missing quite a bit of functionality. Xen 4.1.0 is the first release with a usable libxenlight IMO. Also, the API changed quite a bit between Xen 4.0 and 4.1 and I have not attempted to make the libxl driver work with the preview libxenlight.
Can we enhance the configure test (when there is no explicit --with-libxl) to reject the 4.0.x library, by requiring linking with a function that only exists in 4.1?
Yep, good suggestion. I'll put together a patch later today. Thanks, Jim
participants (3)
-
Daniel P. Berrange -
Eric Blake -
Jim Fehlig