[libvirt] [PATCH 00/10] Enable loadable modules for libvirtd

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:44:26PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 03:13:54PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:57:19PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 02:08:11PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > > So, 'yum install libvirt' would end up pulling in every single hypervisor
> > > > we support (qemu, qemu-kvm, xen), which is not at all what we want.
> > > > 
> > > > Separating the libvirt-daemon-XXX packages from the libvirt-daemon-driver-XXX
> > > > packages is key to achieving the goal of minimising install footprint, while
> > > > maintaining backwards compatibility with existing RPM deps.
> > > 
> > >   I still wonder if it is worth it then. Adding an extra empty rpm just
> > > for the sake or avoiding a explicit hypervisor dependency at the
> > > application level. The whole scheme adds N + 1 empty rpms just for
> > > avoiding that dep that the application need to explicitely state right
> > > now anyway.
> > 
> > I think it is worth it, based on the fact that we get reasonably
> > frequent bug reports that installing libvirt did not install qemu-kvm,
> > or similar.
> 
>   In practice now we ask people to install 'qemu-kvm' directly
> With the change we ask people to install 'libvirt-kvm' instead,

Almost. Currently we ask to install 'libvirt' and 'qemu-kvm',
now we just need to install 'libvirt-daemon-kvm'.

> I don't see such an huge improvement to be honnest, basically ths means
> that people must select the hypervisor at some point, whether it's
> at the base os install vs. at the libvirt install.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|