From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org, fsimonce(a)redhat.com, dougsland(a)redhat.com Cc: "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:21:18 AM Subject: [ovirt-devel] Building vdsm within Fedora Since Vdsm was open-sourced, it was built and deployed via Fedora. Recently [http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214] vdsm introduced a spec-file dependency onf qemu-kvm-rhev, and considered to backport it to the ovirt-3.4 brach. Requiring qemu-kvm-rhev, which is not part of Fedora's EPEL6 branch, violates Fedora's standards. So basically we have two options:

1. Revert the qemu-kvm-rhev dependency.

2. Drop vdsm from EPEL6 (or completely from Fedora); ship Vdsm only within the oVirt repositories.

I favor option 2. The Fedora deployment platform served us well for a long time, but now that ovirt is maturing, we no longer need it for building vdsm. This has the added benefit of removing the need to pass through Fedora's ghastly gateway when adding a Vdsm dependency.

Does anybody object this? If no one does, we would stop updating Vdsm in Fedora, and obsolete it in the future.

From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org, fsimonce(a)redhat.com, dougsland(a)redhat.com Cc: "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske(a)mittwald.de&gt;, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:21:18 PM Subject: Building vdsm within Fedora Since Vdsm was open-sourced, it was built and deployed via Fedora. Recently [http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214] vdsm introduced a spec-file dependency onf qemu-kvm-rhev, and considered to backport it to the ovirt-3.4 brach. Requiring qemu-kvm-rhev, which is not part of Fedora's EPEL6 branch, violates Fedora's standards. So basically we have two options: 1. Revert the qemu-kvm-rhev dependency. 2. Drop vdsm from EPEL6 (or completely from Fedora); ship Vdsm only within the oVirt repositories. A third option would be to have one rpm, with qemu-kvm-rhev, shipped in ovirt, and another without it - shipped in Fedora. I find this overly complex and confusing.

From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Federico Simoncelli" <fsimonce(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: devel(a)ovirt.org, dougsland(a)redhat.com, "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske(a)mittwald.de&gt;, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:00:20 AM Subject: Re: Building vdsm within Fedora Il 24/09/2014 08:53, Federico Simoncelli ha scritto: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org, >> fsimonce(a)redhat.com, dougsland(a)redhat.com >> Cc: "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske(a)mittwald.de&gt;, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; >> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:21:18 PM >> Subject: Building vdsm within Fedora >> >> Since Vdsm was open-sourced, it was built and deployed via >> Fedora. >> >> Recently [http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214] vdsm introduced a spec-file >> dependency onf qemu-kvm-rhev, and considered to backport it to the >> ovirt-3.4 brach. >> >> Requiring qemu-kvm-rhev, which is not part of Fedora's EPEL6 branch, >> violates Fedora's standards. >> >> So basically we have two options: >> >> 1. Revert the qemu-kvm-rhev dependency. >> 2. Drop vdsm from EPEL6 (or completely from Fedora); ship Vdsm only >> within the oVirt repositories. >> >> A third option would be to have one rpm, with qemu-kvm-rhev, shipped in >> ovirt, and another without it - shipped in Fedora. I find this overly >> complex and confusing. > > I think that until now (centos6) we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in the > spec file and then the ovirt repository was distributing qemu-*-rhev > from: > > http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-3.4-snapshot/rpm/el6/x86_64/ > > It this not possible with centos7? Any problem with that? We're shipping qemu-kvm-rhev on 3.4, 3.5 and master for EL6 and EL7. The issue is that if you don't enable ovirt, epel fails repository closure.

From: "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske(a)mittwald.de&gt; To: devel(a)ovirt.org, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:44:17 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] Building vdsm within Fedora On 24/09/14 09:13, Federico Simoncelli wrote: > You probably missed the first part "we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in > the spec file". In that case you won't fail in any requirement. > > Basically the question is: was there any problem on centos6 before > committing http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214 ? Of course there was a problem, please follow the link in this very commit to the according bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127763 In short: you can not use live snapshots without this updated spec file. And it's a PITA to install this package by hand, you must track it's versions yourself etc pp. you basically lose all the stuff a proper spec file gives you. PS: I also don't get the "we want to get vdsm in every distribution" a) it was never in any distro, it was in epel, which is a third party repository anyway, so you can just provide it via ovirt repo imho. b) no one packages vdsm for debian, ubuntu, gentoo, arch, suse, $nameyourdistro or I completely missed it, so why treat fedora in a special way? Don't misunderstand me, it would be cool if you have packages for every distro, or even bsd based stuff, but I think this is still a long way. c) will anyone use vdsm without ovirt? is this even possible? so imho you need ovirt repos anyway?

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sven Kieske" <s.kieske(a)mittwald.de&gt; > To: devel(a)ovirt.org, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt; > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:44:17 AM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Building vdsm within Fedora > > On 24/09/14 09:13, Federico Simoncelli wrote: >> You probably missed the first part "we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in >> the spec file". In that case you won't fail in any requirement. >> >> Basically the question is: was there any problem on centos6 before >> committing http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214 ? > > Of course there was a problem, please follow the link in this very > commit to the according bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127763 > > In short: you can not use live snapshots without this updated spec file. > > And it's a PITA to install this package by hand, you must track > it's versions yourself etc pp. you basically lose all the stuff > a proper spec file gives you. As soon as you have the ovirt repository installed there shouldn't be any reason for you to have any of these problems. Sandro, is there any reason why the rpm available here: http://resources.ovirt.org/pub/ovirt-3.4/rpm/el6/x86_64/ are not published here? http://resources.ovirt.org/releases/3.4/rpm/el6/x86_64/

Is there any additional repository (that provides qemu-*-rhev) that we are missing from the ovirt.repo file?

On 24/09/14 09:13, Federico Simoncelli wrote: > You probably missed the first part "we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in > the spec file". In that case you won't fail in any requirement. > > Basically the question is: was there any problem on centos6 before > committing http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214 ?

Of course there was a problem, please follow the link in this very commit to the according bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127763 In short: you can not use live snapshots without this updated spec file. And it's a PITA to install this package by hand, you must track it's versions yourself etc pp. you basically lose all the stuff a proper spec file gives you.

PS: I also don't get the "we want to get vdsm in every distribution" a) it was never in any distro, it was in epel, which is a third party repository anyway, so you can just provide it via ovirt repo imho. b) no one packages vdsm for debian, ubuntu, gentoo, arch, suse, $nameyourdistro or I completely missed it, so why treat fedora in a special way? Don't misunderstand me, it would be cool if you have packages for every distro, or even bsd based stuff, but I think this is still a long way. c) will anyone use vdsm without ovirt? is this even possible? so imho you need ovirt repos anyway?

Il 24/09/2014 09:44, Sven Kieske ha scritto: > > On 24/09/14 09:13, Federico Simoncelli wrote: >> You probably missed the first part "we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in >> the spec file". In that case you won't fail in any requirement. >> >> Basically the question is: was there any problem on centos6 before >> committing http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214 ? Federico: as we checked a few minutes ago, it seems there's no problem in requiring qemu-kvm/qemu-img in the spec file. Only issue is that if non rhev version is installed a manual "yum update" is required for moving to the rhevm version.

> Of course there was a problem, please follow the link in this very > commit to the according bugzilla: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127763 > > In short: you can not use live snapshots without this updated spec file. > > And it's a PITA to install this package by hand, you must track > it's versions yourself etc pp. you basically lose all the stuff > a proper spec file gives you. Well, since the -rhev package is now available in 3.4, 3.5 and master repos it shouldn't be a PITA anymore. > PS: I also don't get the "we want to get vdsm in every distribution" > a) it was never in any distro, it was in epel, which is a third party > repository anyway, so you can just provide it via ovirt repo imho. > b) no one packages vdsm for debian, ubuntu, gentoo, arch, suse, > $nameyourdistro or I completely missed it, so why treat fedora > in a special way? Don't misunderstand me, it would be cool if you > have packages for every distro, or even bsd based stuff, but I think > this is still a long way. > c) will anyone use vdsm without ovirt? is this even possible? > so imho you need ovirt repos anyway? > > >

From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: crobinso(a)redhat.com, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 4:06:01 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] [ovirt-devel] Building vdsm within Fedora

I did not expect to hear much support for keeping Vdsm in Fedora. Given what I've heard, how about taking the in-between road? - Keep Vdsm in Fedora, abiding to Fedora rules. - Hope that Engine and qemu-kvm-rhev join, too. - Until they do, build vdsm.rpm with non-Fedora quirks (such as the qemu-kvm-rhev requirement) http://gerrit.ovirt.org/33367 spec: do not require qemu-kvm-rhev on Fedora http://gerrit.ovirt.org/33368 spec: allow all archs in Fedora

On 09/25/2014 04:06 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: >I don't belive Vdsm is soon to be used by anything outside oVirt. But if >software purists win, oVirt would publish only tarballs. >Fedora/Debian/whatever would build, package, and deploy them all, and >the ovirt repo would become redundant. > >I did not expect to hear much support for keeping Vdsm in Fedora. Given >what I've heard, how about taking the in-between road? > >- Keep Vdsm in Fedora, abiding to Fedora rules. >- Hope that Engine and qemu-kvm-rhev join, too. we did the work to add engine, but it was useless without its gui, and was impossible to add gwt to fedora. qemu-kvm-rhev is not needed in fedora as fedora has a full blown qemu-kvm with all features enabled. you only need qemu-kvm-rhev on .el6 hosts.

>- Until they do, build vdsm.rpm with non-Fedora quirks (such as the > qemu-kvm-rhev requirement)

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: crobinso(a)redhat.com, "users" <users(a)ovirt.org&gt;, devel(a)ovirt.org > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:06:01 PM > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] [ovirt-users] Building vdsm within Fedora > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:57:21AM +0200, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > > Il 24/09/2014 09:44, Sven Kieske ha scritto: > > > > > > > > > On 24/09/14 09:13, Federico Simoncelli wrote: > > >> You probably missed the first part "we were using qemu-kvm/qemu-img in > > >> the spec file". In that case you won't fail in any requirement. > > >> > > >> Basically the question is: was there any problem on centos6 before > > >> committing http://gerrit.ovirt.org/31214 ? > > > > Federico: as we checked a few minutes ago, it seems there's no problem in > > requiring qemu-kvm/qemu-img in the spec file. > > Only issue is that if non rhev version is installed a manual "yum update" > > is required for moving to the rhevm version. > > Right. Without the patch, RPM does not enforce qemu-kvm-rhev. So our > code has to check for qemu-kvm-rhev functionality, instead of knowing > that it is there. Furthermore, we had several reports of users finding > themselves without qemu-kvm-rhev on their node, and not understanding > why they do not have live merge. Live merge? The biggest problem with live merge is libvirt not qemu.

Anyway the qemu-kvm/qemu-kvm-rhev problem is relevant only for centos and centos has a specific way to address these special needs: http://www.centos.org/variants/ """ A CentOS variant is a special edition of CentOS Linux that starts with the core distribution, then replaces or supplements a specific subset of packages. This may include replacing everything down to the kernel, networking, and other subsystems. """ I think the plan was to have our own centos variant (shipping qemu-kvm-rhev). I remember Doron participated to the centos meetings but I don't remember the outcome.