Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/8] raisin: Fix CentOS build

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On 04/17/2015 11:14 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Thu, 16 Apr 2015, George Dunlap wrote:
> > >> Add package dependencies for CentOS.  Also use PKGTYPE rather than
> > >> DISTRO to determine if we need rpm-build.
> > >>
> > >> I've tested this for xen but not for libvirt or grub.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> ---
> > >> CC: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> ---
> > >>  components/grub    |  5 +++++
> > >>  components/libvirt |  7 +++++++
> > >>  components/xen     | 10 ++++++++--
> > >>  lib/commands.sh    |  2 +-
> > >>  4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/components/grub b/components/grub
> > >> index 563a28c..af396d9 100644
> > >> --- a/components/grub
> > >> +++ b/components/grub
> > >> @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@ function grub_check_package() {
> > >>      local DEP_Fedora_x86_32="$DEP_Fedora_common"
> > >>      local DEP_Fedora_x86_64="$DEP_Fedora_common glibc-devel.i686"
> > >>  
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_common="make gcc tar automake autoconf sysconftool 
> > >> bison flex \
> > >> +                             glibc-devel"
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_x86_32="$DEP_CentOS_common"
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_x86_64="$DEP_CentOS_common glibc-devel.i686"
> > > 
> > > Given that they are the same as Fedora, I think it is OK to:
> > > 
> > > local DEP_CentOS_common="$DEP_Fedora_common"
> > 
> > In a previous version of the patch I had
> > "DEP_RedHat_{common,x86_32,x86_64}" (to mean things that were common
> > between all RH decendants, like Fedora or CentOS); but I couldn't make
> > the include stuff work properly.  Maybe just have a DEP_RedHat_common,
> > and allow the x86-specific ones to include it?
> 
> But from the look of your patch the list of dependencies at the moment
> is exactly the same between Fedora and CentOS, so I would avoid
> DEP_RedHat_{common,x86_32,x86_64}, I would just local
> DEP_CentOS_common="$DEP_Fedora_common".
> 
> 
> > >>  
> > >>      if [[ $ARCH != "x86_64" && $ARCH != "x86_32" ]]
> > >>      then
> > >> diff --git a/components/libvirt b/components/libvirt
> > >> index 5853950..aef1bc8 100644
> > >> --- a/components/libvirt
> > >> +++ b/components/libvirt
> > >> @@ -18,6 +18,13 @@ function libvirt_check_package() {
> > >>      local DEP_Fedora_x86_32="$DEP_Fedora_common"
> > >>      local DEP_Fedora_x86_64="$DEP_Fedora_common"
> > >>  
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_common="patch make gcc libtool autoconf 
> > >> gettext-devel     \
> > >> +                             python-devel libxslt yajl-devel 
> > >> libxml2-devel     \
> > >> +                             device-mapper-devel libpciaccess-devel     
> > >>        \
> > >> +                             libuuid-devel perl-XML-XPath"
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_x86_32="$DEP_CentOS_common"
> > >> +    local DEP_CentOS_x86_64="$DEP_CentOS_common"
> > > 
> > > Same here, also please test the libvirt build: the list of dependencies
> > > is pretty big, I worry that one of them might actually differ from Fedora
> > 
> > If there were something missing, it wouldn't be a regression (since
> > libvirt doesn't apply without this patch either).  Testing libvirt is on
> > my to-do list, but if I don't get to it, would you mind checking it in
> > as-is (once the series is in better shape)?  I'll definitely get libvirt
> > working before the release.
> 
> Having the code in will give the impression that it works already, so I
> am not very happy about this, but OK.

I made the changes and committed.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel