[fedora-virt] QEMU new Package

[Glauber Costa]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 10:53:47PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 06:11:31PM -0200, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > Hi guys.
> > 
> > I've built a qemu image in here:
> > 
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1102151
> > 
> > It contains the basic work to get qemu package updated. Basically,
> > we're talking about getting the qemu code from svn and creating multiple
> > packages, so one could grab just the architecture of interest.
> > Todo, is the creation of a meta-package to grab'em all at once.
> > 
> > This is also the first step in merging qemu and kvm packages, which
> > I'd like to do in two steps.
> > 
> > 1) This one.
> > 2) replace qemu-svn with kvm-userspace
> > 
> > The later is not as trivial as it seems. Nobody exercices this path
> > usually, and we're likely to find bugs that prevent the build to finish
> > (Well, I tested, and there _are_ bugs ;-) ). But I believe we can have
> > it sorted out.
> > 
> > If no one has any major opposition to the state of things, I intend to
> > commit it to CVS tomorrow (with some minor changes), and put it into
> > rawhide so we can start having a more serious testing out of it.
> 
> The major blocker here is that it breaks upgrades. ie, upgrade to F11
> and you end up with an install with no emulators present. 'qemu' should
> stay as a package which pulls in everything - by Requires on all the
> sub-RPMs. I agree with mark that there are too many sub-RPMs here.
> I think we should group related archs, so that all x86 related system
> emulators are in one sub-RPM, all mips together, all sh together, etc
> 
> Also, the /etc/init.d/qemu script will need updating to take account
> of the fact that not all usermode emulators will be present - it should
> only register binary format handlers for those which are actually
> installed.
> 
> Also, you'll need to have the keymap files in a sub-RPM that all the
> qemu-system-X packages can depend on, since the keymap data files are
> needed for all the binaries which support SDL & VNC.
> 
Open question:

Do we want the requirements to match %{version}-%{release} ? 
(I believe so)