[Libvirt-cim] [PATCH] add RPM packaging for libvirt-cim, and cleanups

[Jay Gagnon]

Dan Smith wrote:
> DV> # HG changeset patch
> DV> # User Daniel Veillard <veillard at redhat.com>
> DV> # Date 1193656844 -3600
> DV> # Node ID 5b601a0035127544c54feaf086fb7065f873e9f9
> DV> # Parent  aaad430ea766d9a3bc0be035e595d8da17ee2122
> DV> RPM Packaging changes and associated cleanups:
> DV>   - Augment some Makefiles variables with missing files
> DV>   - add a spec file template
> DV>   - extend the configure script to generate the spec file
> DV>   - add a 'make rpm' target
> DV>   - fix src/Makefile.am to use late binding of providerdir variable
>
> Works for me.  +1
>
> DV> There is still one thing missing I guess in the spec file: the
> DV> registration step, which I think should be run as a post-install
> DV> script. The spec file saves the provider-register.sh and
> DV> register_base.sh scripts in /usr/share/libvirt-cim/ so they are
> DV> available at that point, but I don't understand how to best call
> DV> them, so it will need some attention by someone who knows how that
> DV> process should work.
>
> I *think* the rpm needs to do that in the postinstall step, although
> I'm not sure if/how the determination of which CIMOM is to be used
> should be made.  If the rpm assumes pegasus is installed, then perhaps
> it should be hard-coded and the user can re-run the provider
> registration if they are using something non-standard?
>
> Heidi would probably be the one to comment on the convention here.
>
> Anyone have a problem with putting this in the tree now and fixing up
> the registration step in a subsequent patch?
>
>
>   
I'm all for "mostly works" over "not in the tree at all," especially
given how relatively immature the code is.  It's not like we've got a
finished and polished product yet; we've got a little time to straighten
out the postinstall, and having the rpm stuff in there would be nice. :)


-- 

-Jay