On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com > wrote:
> > > On 7/30/2014 11:49 AM, Joe Gordon wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com >> <mailto:berra...@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 06:39:56AM -0700, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> > This change: >> > >> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105501/ >> > >> > Tries to pull in libvirt-python >= 1.2.5 for testing. >> > >> > I'm on Ubuntu Precise for development which has libvirt 0.9.8. >> > >> > The latest libvirt-python appears to require libvirt >= 0.9.11. >> > >> > So do I have to move to Trusty? >> >> You can use the CloudArchive repository to get newer libvirt and >> qemu packages for Precise, which is what anyone deploying the >> Ubuntu provided OpenStack packages would be doing. >> >> >> I am not a fan of this approach the patch above along with [0], broke >> Minesweeper [1] and Matt, I am worried that we will be breaking other >> folks as well. I don't think we should force folks to upgrade to a newer >> version of libvirt just to do some code cleanup. I think we should >> revert these patches. >> >> "Increase the min required libvirt version to 0.9.11 since >> >> >> we require that for libvirt-python from PyPI to build >> successfully. Kill off the legacy CPU model configuration >> and legacy OpenVSwitch setup code paths only required by >> libvirt < 0.9.11" >> >> >> [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58494/ >> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014- >> July/041457.html >> >> >> Regards, >> Daniel >> -- >> |: http://berrange.com -o- >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| >> |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| >> |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| >> |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc >> :| >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> <mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > So https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58494/ is new to me as of today. > > The 0.9.8 on ubuntu precise broke me (and our internal CI system which is > running against precise images, but that's internal so meh). The gate is > running against ubuntu trusty and I have a way forward on getting updated > libvirt in ubuntu precise (with updated docs on how others can as well), > which is a short-term fix until I move my dev environment to ubuntu trusty. > > My bigger concern here was how this impacts RHEL 6.5 which I'm running > Juno on, but looks like that has libvirt 0.10.2 so I'm good. While forcing people to move to a newer version of libvirt is doable on most environments, do we want to do that now? What is the benefit of doing so? Is it ok to do without a deprecation cycle? Proposed revert patches: https://review.openstack.org/110773 https://review.openstack.org/110774 > > -- > > Thanks, > > Matt Riedemann > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
