On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 03:07:49PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: > On 05/13/10 15:04, Cole Robinson wrote: > > On 05/13/2010 04:35 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote: > >> On 05/12/10 22:48, Cole Robinson wrote: > >> I think rather than 1, it would be better to add a patch to libvirt to > >> catch both formats. I know Chris Lalancette already cooked up a patch > >> for this. Combined with the 2) patch I just posted, and 3) I think that > >> should take care of the problems. > > > > It doesn't solve the problem for existing libvirt installations. It's > > not uncommon for users to track just the latest kvm releases without > > upgrading libvirt: any future qemu or kvm release will break every > > version of libvirt that exists today. Given that unfortunate case, I > > still recommend reverting the 'PC' change at least for long enough for a > > few fixed libvirt releases to make it into the wild. > > But that is no different from what we have today. Users who update their > qemu and see issues with libvirt can also be asked to update libvirt. I > have already had several cases where I needed to do that anyway.
The general policy of QEMU has been to try and avoid known breakage of existing apps unless unavoidable. This change introduced 100% guarenteed breakage of every single deployment that exists today, for the sake of removing 2 characters from a string. I really don't think this is a good cost/benefit tradeoff & agree with Cole that I'd like to see this reverted for the 0.13 release, and re-considered in a later release once we've had a chance to get a preventative fix out for libvirt using -version-string or equivalent. Regards, Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://deltacloud.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
