[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Goal: guestfsd?

Svante Signell, le Mon 05 Sep 2011 22:02:13 +0200, a écrit :
> In order to get libguestfs (having package guestfsd) built

I'm not sure to understand: why do you want guestfsd? That's one more
package, sure, but except from qcow/vmdk images, we can already do what
it does.

> libsys-virt-perl depends on libvirt-dev while 
> fuse and febootstrap needs support/workarounds for mount.h

As I mentioned in another mail, it'd probably better to make them use
file_set_translator, since the parameters will have to be fixed anyway,
there is not much benefit in providing an interface which will fail.

> As a test I managed to enable libvirt to build by cheating a little when
> building dnsmasq-base, installing it and then doing some tweaks to get
> libvirt built.

It can only be accepted as a bootstrap phase. Packages in the main
archive have to be buildable without patches and with the main packages.
That is why debian-ports package should only be seen as a way to
accelerate package built, but eventually everything has to be accepted
in main.

> Other missing definitions for dnsmasq are: sockaddr_dl, LLADDR:
> sys/if_dl.h and IP_RECVIF: sys/netinet/in.h if BSD network or
> IP_PKTINFO: bits/in.h if Linux network.

This is not so simple: we can not blindly define them to some random
value. We need to take care which value to give to avoid hindering any
future implementation.

> If the patches from Zheng Da and R Braun are applied, how much work is
> still needed to get bps as an integrated part of gnumach/hurd/libc?

No idea.


Reply to: