On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 13:54:06 +0100
Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
On 27.02.2018 13:35, Nir Soffer wrote:
> בתאריך יום ג׳, 27 בפבר׳ 2018, 13:25, מאת Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz>:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:13:15 +0100
>> Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 27.02.2018 01:26, Nir Soffer wrote:
>>>> בתאריך יום ב׳, 26 בפבר׳ 2018, 22:10, מאת Yaniv Kaul
>>>> <ykaul(a)redhat.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Viktor Mihajlovski <
>>>>> mihajlov(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just tried to update the ovirt packages on my FC27 host, but
>>>>>> failed due to
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/87628/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> vdsm now requires libvirt >= 3.10.0-132 but Fedora 27 has
only
>>>>>> 3.7.0-4 the moment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's generic Fedora 27, but since I run on s390,
cross-posting
>>>>>> to s390 list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess there's good reason to require libvirt 3.10. Is
there
>>>>>> any chance that we can get libvirt updated for Fedora 27?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps use the virt-preview[1] repo for now?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, we require virt-preview for Fedora. This is why that patch
>>>> did not fail in the CI.
>>> Makes sense, unfortunately virt-preview doesn't contains s390
>>> binaries at this point in time. Would be great if at least
>>> libvirt and qemu could be built for s390.
>>
>> looks like it's even x86_64 only, /me wonders what it would
>> require to offer other arches (aarch64, ppc64le, s390x) as well
>>
>
> If we need to support platform not supported in virt-preview, we
> need to chage the requirement so it is used only on x86_64.
>
> Victor, would you like to send a patch?
I believe there was a good reason to bump the libvirt requirement in
the vdsm package (some bugfix). Ideally, virt-preview should be build
for s390 as well.
If I'm not mistaking, the script
https://github.com/crobinso/build-fedora-virt-preview is used to build
the RPMs and populate the repository.
Dan, Cole: what would it take to run this on the fedora-390 build
machine?
after a brief look the script needs to be made multi-arch-aware (it
hard-codes x86_64 in some places), when it calls mock, and then it
needs some HW (we have ppc64le and s390x even now, aarch64 might take
a while), overall it looks doable to me. Cole, what do you think?
Dan