[CentOS-virt] Actions and IRC log from May 6th VIRT SIG meeting
Lars Kurth
lars.kurth at xen.org
Tue May 6 14:31:27 UTC 2014
Hi all,
I summarized actions on
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status tagged
with 06/05
The meeting LOG is below
Regards
Lars
lars_kurth How do you want to run this? We have a set of lose ends: the
roadmap via
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003763.html
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003763.html>
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> if someone (lars?) wants to
just do it point by point we can run through those.
lars_kurth And some open actions:
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status
<http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status>
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there is a 60 min hard stop at
the end
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> hi all
lars_kurth How about the following: Actions first, then George can do
the roadmap?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok, works for me
lars_kurth Do we all have
http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status
<http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Virtualization/Status> up?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i do
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> yep
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep
lars_kurth kbsingh: there were 3 technical items on you. I know you and
hughesjr and gwd had a conversation
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i believe gwd is setup with
the basic workflow, and has git access
lars_kurth last week. Is there anything that can be ticked off in the
technical category?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we only imported the main xen
repo at this point, but if things are looking ok and if the process is
something we can work with - i cna go ahead and import the rest of the
repos
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> So it's imported into git.centos.org?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> humm
lars_kurth kbsingh: what would the URL be?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick>
https://git.centos.org/project/sig-virt
<https://git.centos.org/project/sig-virt>
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> is where it should come up on
lars_kurth definitely there
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> right, so the blocker was how
are we going to organise the git repos on github - are we going to setup
some teams at the project level or the repos level
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick>
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010175.html
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2014-April/010175.html>
is the conversation
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i dont believe we all got to a
result there.
lars_kurth Do we need to reply to this thread?
lars_kurth Or is this more general?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well you had asked about having a
different org for each sig, and Karsten said that sounded reasonable.
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Is there any reason not to give that a
try for now?
lars_kurth Can we close this now. Or do we just have an action to
engage with the discussion?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I can reply to the thread.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there are a couple of threads
that fall out from this
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> eg. where is the kernel going
to be maintained - and is every sig that needs a kernel then going to
need to maintain the entire thing
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> or can we just have a single
git repo, with sig's maintaining their own branches
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> I see a meeting in progress
...cool
lars_kurth hughesjr: hi. A little painful on IRC, but welcome
lars_kurth kbsingh: does sounds like a centos-wide decision that needs
to be made. I propose to take an action for gwd and me to replay to the
respective threads.
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Is there really a difference? Isn't
that the point of DVCS?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: for the sake of
convenience, I'd say maybe we just trial the model of having everything
under /CentOS/ and if or when we run into a problem, we can try to
change things around
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's certainly a lot easier to begin
with.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok
lars_kurth ok.Cool: I made a note
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lets take that away then as a
todo
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: So you're going to clone all
the repos into git.centos.org and github.com/CentOS/ ?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I've replied to the thread as
well
lars_kurth Added as new action. Gwd may need to tidy up if I misunderstood
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: yeah, I can go ahead and
do that as well - not online right now, but it can be done today
lars_kurth IS: KaranbirSingh to put together list of repository names
in Xen4CentOS such that we can use it as a baseline - still open?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> yes
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> that should get resolved with
the move
lars_kurth Alright. Move to Community?
lars_kurth My list policy item is still open
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What was the list policy question? I
forget.
lars_kurth And we were discussing whether kbsingh wanted to attend the
Hackathon. I will need to know pretty soon, as we are running out of space
lars_kurth gwd: just send a reminder to people that posting to the list
while not subscribed = mail discarded
lars_kurth Do we want to keep this, or change it?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I do want to come to the
hackathon
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> discard> got it.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i believe there is some
libvirt people as well ?
lars_kurth OK. In that case, I will reserve a space and add you to the
wiki
lars_kurth Yes. Daniel Berrage
lars_kurth As well as some other Xen folks working on libvirt
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> jonludlam: Do you know who from the
XenServer team is coming?
lars_kurth Let me check
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> dave scott
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> me
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> not sure about others
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> euanh, do you know?
euanh <ircs://freenode/euanh,isnick> I'm hoping to come
lars_kurth
http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Hackathon/May2014#Confirmed_attendees
<http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Hackathon/May2014#Confirmed_attendees>
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> jonludlam: For this meeting, knowing
that you & dave are coming is sufficient I think.
lars_kurth jonludlam: you are signed up
euanh <ircs://freenode/euanh,isnick> don't know about others
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> David Vrabel and Andrew
Cooper on that list
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: You have an outstanding
item to e-mail the -virt mailing list. Are you planning on doing that?
Does it make sense to do so if there are only a handful of places left?
lars_kurth kbsingh: OK, I will add a few more people as provisional to
the list. I only have 40 spaces and all of the remaining 8 are waiting
for travel approval, visas, etc. (including kbsingh in the
lars_kurth kbsingh: will send instructions to sign you up fully
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> there was also some word from
ovirt guys
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i dont know if they have
someone local - but they dont have xen support
lars_kurth kbsingh: I need to know ASAP who that would be, if they want
to get a space
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> ok, i can ping around
lars_kurth kbsingh: great
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> iirc ovirt had some sort of Xen
support in the beginning
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> and then later they switched to
"kvm only"
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Hopefully with the improved libvirt
support, getting xen support back in should be straightforward.
lars_kurth pasik: I was copied on a thread which says that integrating
ovirt with xen+libvirt may be non-trivial as ovirt makes assumptions
underneath libvirt
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: yep
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Shall we put that as another agenda
item and finish going through the actions?
lars_kurth there are no quick fixes. I would say let's get libvirt
support better first and then look at next steps
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: agreed
lars_kurth gwd: How about adding it to longer term roadmap goals
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: We can certainly have a
wishlist -- the question is who's going to do the work.
lars_kurth gwd: I will add an action on you to create a roadmap wiki
page. Is that OK?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: Ack.
lars_kurth gwd: good question. I think wishlist = looking for a volunteer
lars_kurth OK. The last set of open actions was Publicty
lars_kurth The state of play was that we got the centos board feedback,
made fixes and reported back to Karsten
lars_kurth Karsten still has to ACK
lars_kurth I asked for Advisory Board approval on the assumption that
he would do so
lars_kurth So the blocking issue is for the centos board to ACK
lars_kurth kbsingh: can you take this on or chase Karsten?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lars_kurth: i can ping him
lars_kurth thanks. Tracked everything
lars_kurth gwd: over to you
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> 28 minutes until kbsingh needs to go
lars_kurth as an aside: how do I get the IRC logs for this channel?
lars_kurth gwd: I think we are all looking at
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003765.html
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2014-April/003765.html>
and responses
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Roadmap> I sent out a mail with a
basic discussion of what we talked about two weeks ago; I don't think
there were any additions or objections
lars_kurth Do we have any disagreements / open questions in this thread?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> So I'll make a concrete to-do list and
post it on a wiki page.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> cool
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I think one thing kbsingh suggested is
that we want to have most of the basic stuff sorted out before RHEL 7
comes out in... what, June / July?
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> Not sure if this is the
right time to bring this up, but I was wondering about bumping the
version of ocaml used when building xen
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> I think the current xen4.2 rpms
are built against ocaml3
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> yep
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> and there was/is the dev repo
against ocaml4 aswell
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> I think at some point in
xen4centos's history, there was ocaml4 in there
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What happened with that? I don't know
any of the histyr
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so first we need to get the xen
4.4 rpms built, probably against ocaml4
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: what happened is
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> this issue is it breaks
everything else ocaml in the distro
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> yes
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: we just decided to go with
the "distro stock ocaml3" because xapi stuff wasn't done yet
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> ocaml is incredibly picky
about versions
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Not used to being enterprise yet, I
take it...
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> that means, we have to take
on also fixing other distro things
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> that are ocaml
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so do we want to first build xen
4.4 again ocaml3 ?
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> right, unless there's a
way for things to co-exist
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> +st
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> jonludlam: I suppose we can
do an SCL for xen stuff
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> ...and there's no way to have both
versions somehow, and have each package use the library it needs?
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> recent version of ocaml
are much happier about coexisting with other versions
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: if we do ocaml4 as an
SCL that would work .. now if we can is another issue
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> hughesjr, would the SCL
_contain_ xen then?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> What does SCL stand for?
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> software collections
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> == coexistence of
different versions of things
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> missed the libvirt/xen discussion earlier
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Software CoLlection. Nice.
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> xen 4.4.0 src.rpm (for fedora 21)
here:
ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/source/SRPMS/x/xen-4.4.0-3.fc21.src.rpm
<ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/source/SRPMS/x/xen-4.4.0-3.fc21.src.rpm>
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: kbsingh showed me how the basic
CentOS build system works, so I'm going to try doing the 4.4 update once
the repos are sorted out.
lars_kurth DV: I don't think we had a specific discussion before
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> (Maybe after doing a more minor update
as a test first.)
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> lars_kurth: just a few excahnge on IRC ^^^
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: that sounds good
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> OK, so can we update to 4.4, then
update libvirt, and look into doing ocaml for Xen as an SCL?
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: that sounds like a good
plan
lars_kurth gwd: I guess the question is which libvirt version
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> How would an SCL work if
xen depends upon it?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Are there any other package updates we
need to do?
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so the first iteration of xen 4.4
rpms would be built against ocaml3, so there's an upgrade path from xen
4.2 rpms ?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> lars_kurth: On the list we decided
1.2.3, the same as Ubuntu 14.04. (Or maybe it was 1.2.2 -- whichever one
Ubuntu is using).
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> lars_kurth: what is in Fedora 20 get
backports, but it's a bit 'old' already
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: We seem to be talking about
libvirt now -- did you have a comment / question / concern?
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> lars_kurth: I think whatever
version of libvirt is in ubuntu 14.04 LTS is a good starting point
(seriously :D)
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> libvirt 1.2.2 it was, I think.
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: mostly watching, and seeing if
there is pit to avoid
lars_kurth We could agree on this for now and decide to upgrade later
(after the Hackathon discussion)
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: Well we're planning on updating to
libvirt 1.2.2, and then maybe backporting important functionality (such
as live migration).
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> too bad el7 looks to have libvirt
1.1.1
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> notes other SIGs may want libvirt
updates without becoming over zealous might be worth checking around to
minimize builds
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: Noted. Know of any that we should
coordinate with?
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> pasik: usually in RHEL there is a lot of
backports, so base version not always a good indicator
lars_kurth DV, kbsingh: do you have any visibility to what other SIG's
need? If not, we should maybe poll on the centos-devel list
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lars_kurth: yes, and no
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i think we should deliver
something, anything, just ship it
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I think going forward, all changes /
pull requests will be posted to the centos-virt list, so any specific
change can be objected to when it actually gets submitted.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> that gives people a target to
point at
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> kb
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> otherwise we might get into
masive wish lists
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> kbsingh, if other sigs are not more
advanced, ACk
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: That sounds like a plan.
lars_kurth kbsingh: works for me
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> DV: yep
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> yeah, i thin kthe virtsig is
perhaps the best place at the moment
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> If kbsingh / hughesjr have their
fingers in other sigs, they can bring us in when we need to start
coordinating about something.
lars_kurth Works for me. So we agreed to start with 1.2.2?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's what we talked about on the
-virt list, and nobody has objected.
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> let's do what ubuntu 14.04 lts
has; so libvirt 1.2.2
lars_kurth Just confirming for the minutes. Agreed then.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> 1.2.2 works for me, if - (1)
we have qemu rbd supported for both ceph and gluster ( libfgfacl )
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> there have been a lot of libxl updates
in 1.2.3, but you know better what you need
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> from earlier.. did we agree to
build the first xen 4.4 rpms against ocaml3, so the current users of el6
xen 4.2 rpms can upgrade smoothly ?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> pasik: if we didnt, then we
should
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> hughesjr: ^ ? ocaml3 ?
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> DV: those libxl updates need to be
backported
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, does the ocaml
version have much bearing on the upgrade?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Should we move the really technical
discussion to the mailing list?
lalatenduM <ircs://freenode/lalatenduM,isnick> kbsingh, I think libvirt
1.2.3 has few imp bug fixes for gluster
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> pasik: and lot of code churn in 1.2.3,
this may not be that easy
lars_kurth How about, we m
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> hmm
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> lalatenduM: in that case,
maybe we should consider 1.2.3
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well if backporting is too hard, we
can think about moving forward instead.
lars_kurth we propose 1.2.2 on the list and ask for any backports
necessary (pointing to patches)
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> how about we decide on a 1.2.x
and take the conversation to the lists to decide
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so then let's move to 1.2.4 directly?
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> well .. if we maintai the
same major version as ubuntu, things will work better in both places and
we can more easily reuse code
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> libvirt said they would do maintenance
updates for any downstream actively using it; I think CentOS would be
big enough to be worth their consideration.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> given DV has an eye on
libvirt, what do you think ?
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> Indent top-level labels by one space in
... Use K&R style for curly braces in ... that kind of patches goes in
the way of backports
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> we can do whatever you guys
want ... but centos is not intended to be fedora
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Going with 1.2.2 was just an attempt
to reduce the burden on upstream.
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> but hard to tell a priori if it really
will make it hard
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> <gwd> Well if backporting is too hard,
we can think about moving forward instead. : that's reasonable
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Well let's look at 1.2.2 and try a few
backports and see how it works.
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> ack
lars_kurth Agreed. Will add an action on gwd
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: about ocaml version:
like said the current xen 4.2 rpms are built against ocaml3, and if xen
4.4 rpms added ocaml4 as a requirement, then all the distro ocaml stuff
would break in the xen 4.2 -> xen 4.4 upgrade.. I don't think we want to
do that.
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: so I'd say let's first
build xen 4.4 against ocaml3; and then let's figure out the SCL stuff so
we can properly do xen 4.4 with ocaml4
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, they shouldn't be
run-time requirements
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> used to assemble RHEL libvirt builds for
too long, some reflexes persists
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> One thing we might want to talk about
(maybe on the -devel list) is changing the "binary blob" thing in the
CentOS build system to make it earier to collaborate with people who
don't have access to the "blob repo" (sorry I don't know the proper
terms for these things)
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: lookasides or something
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: I'd much rather learn the easy
way, from your experience, than the hard way, from my own.
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> pasik, btw, no problem
starting with ocaml3 with a view to seeing how ocaml4 might turn out
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> jonludlam: ok
lars_kurth Anything else we need to discuss?
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: TBH the libvirt team use to rebase
frequently, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 ... because code changes fast and want to
minimize backport loads
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: ok, if you start that
off, we can hash it out ( the lookaside thing )
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Most of the blobs in Xen4Centos seem
to be upstream tarballs. One option would be to have a URL of the
upstream, with a local cache to make builds reliable.
lars_kurth We have 2 minutes: I would propose to raise loose ends after
the meeting on the list
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: i guess people can still
checkout and do local things, and the get_sources.sh could be injected
into the git repo itself
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: that said being 0.0.2 behind means
only 2 months, should be okay
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: I was able to do custom local
rebuilds of centos src.rpms; I used the get_sources.sh
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i am guessing there isnt a LTS
sort of version - so we'd need a plan to keep things patched without
needing a system update every 2 months
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: The hard part would be pull
requests.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> do we have any other major
points on the agenda
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: true
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: pasik: pull requests on
binary data will always be against ( or well, used to be against ) a new
srpm
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> so we just run the import
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: I think we should
write something about ocaml version
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> I don't think so -- I'll kick off a
discussion on -virt about packages to update
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> And make a roadmap wiki
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> but we can also have remote
urls in the .package.metadata file - and people can request merges
against that
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> I believe there's been
some discussion before about the structure of the xen rpms - is that
minuted anywhere?
jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> ^^+1
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: my suggestions, use git, cherry
pick from upstream into a set of commit bringing what you want on top of
your branch, use that as you patch list
lars_kurth pasik, jonludlam: no - can I get you to make a proposal on
the list
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> jcpunk: +1 to what
jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> looking for documented structure
jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> of rpms
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: see the libvirt rpms from Fedora or
RHEL they should be largely explicit
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> this was on the virt list ages
ago. we essentially went with the carry-in-spec for the leaf nodes
needed at build time.
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: That seems reasonable.
jcpunk <ircs://freenode/jcpunk,isnick> kbsingh: ah, got it
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> i suspect jonludlam is talking
about the entire wider scope
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> lars_kurth: yeah sure, jonludlam
is probably the expert with ocaml stuff
lars_kurth OK: will add action
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> right, interested in
splitting dom0 rpms from domU, etc
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> jonludlam: i dont think we've
had that conversation at this point. but we should
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> ok, perhaps next meeting
then?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> if we dont have any other
items, i just want to bring one in - and this is past the scheduled
hour, but worth talking about
lars_kurth Maybe next time or on list?
jonludlam <ircs://freenode/jonludlam,isnick> gotta run to another
meeting now
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> DV: I'm fairly new to RPM building: I
take it there's a step where you explicitly export base..tip as a series
of patches?
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: I've got time.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we have a bit of a problem
with el7rc kernel not doing pv out of the blocks
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That's not as a guest, right?
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: only redhat kernel team
can do something about that..
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> when i say a bit of a problem
- i mean this is a major train crash kind of problem, given how much of
hosting and cloud is pv only
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: redhat disabled xen pv
support for el7 kernel
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: yes you can ask git to give them a
name based on commit text, and in the rpm spec you list them in order
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: (xen hvm is still supported)
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> pasik: right, i dont care
about the rhel7 state of play, but we might need to do something in the
centos ecosystem and own it locally
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: yep, definitely we should
"fix" that for centos7
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: it is.. as a guest, cant
run rhel7 as a pv guest. only hvm-pv and hvm ( ofcourse )
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> I will get the git repos in
place and the acl's setup this week for the xen stuff to happen
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: Oh, that's right. But does it
have PVHVM support?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> and we can maybe target a 4.4
build as a testing/qa process.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: yes. pvhvm works
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> kbsingh: So are you thinking of having
a CentOS guest kernel that supports PV?
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> so probably just a small .config
tweak
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: well, we will have a
kernel that supports dom0 too at some point
DV <ircs://freenode/DV,isnick> gwd: git log --pretty=%f -1 your-commit
and use that as a base for the filename of the associated patch
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> gwd: i dont know - dont want
to predecide and havent really spent any time thinking this though - but
i do know that we need to ( spend the time, think it through, do
something )
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> o, lars_kurth are we calling
this meting closed ? ( i am already on the phone waiting for the next
one to open )
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> kbsingh: yes, i think we should
have some kernel variant with "fixed" .config
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> Would the PV kernel be basically the
same as the Xen4CentOS dom0? Or a stripped-down version? Or were you
thinking of taking the upstream RH kernel and re-enabling PV (meaning
another separate kernel branch to maintain)?
lars_kurth yes: let's call it closed
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: i think it should
upstream-el7-kernel with just the .config tweak
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> gwd: we can do more than one
if we want
hughesjr <ircs://freenode/hughesjr,isnick> (or need to)
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: and any xen pv specific
patches, if there's a need for those ever
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> gwd: so maintenance-wise it would
be quite low effort.. hopefully
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> pasik: Well, one would hope...
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> And would that be a change to the main
CentOS kernel? Or a separate package that's included for cloud targets?
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> change to main kernel would
need quite a major reason, and a lot of shouting and requests - I
suspect we dont/wont get that initially.
kbsingh <ircs://freenode/kbsingh,isnick> we could carry it on the
install media though... so its available to use right off the bat, post
install ( specially if its the same version as the install / main kernel )
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> That sounds pretty do-able.
pasik <ircs://freenode/pasik,isnick> yep
gwd <ircs://freenode/gwd,isnick> OK -- lars_kurth, are you going to
send out a meeting report?
lars_kurth gwd: pointing to the actions and appending this log for now
More information about the CentOS-virt
mailing list