On Monday, February 6, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Cole Robinson wrote:
> On 02/06/2012 08:12 AM, Michael DeHaan wrote: > > Hi again Cole! > > > > Hmm … yes, I remember this discussion from years ago :) > > > > First comments are that this is both a decent new approach (using the CLI > > versus XML), and I'm also very concerned that you didn't test it yet, and > > that > > there may be several subtle regressions we wouldn't pick up until it > > shipped, > > because of workarounds around things libvirt didn't (used to) do. > > > > > If your target is latest RHEL5, I'm pretty confident that most of the > virtinst/libvirt workarounds are now obsolete. All things considered, RHEL5.7 > has pretty modern libvirt and virtinst. > > > Not having a lot of time this AM to review…just a few quick questions. > > > > We need to make sure all the disk and network options continue to work, > > which > > were implemented when libvirt didn't provide those capabilities. Does it > > support LVM and multiple network interfaces, etc in the exact same way (end > > result wise)? > > > > > None of the disk or network handling here relies on libvirt's storage/network > management functionality, it should continue to work as before, modulo bugs. > > > Similarly, I need to know if any options are used are available in newer > > distributions but not older, as Cobbler needing to work in say, EL 5, is > > vitally important. Typically this has happened in the past, where libvirt > > was > > not running at equal versions on different distros. > > > > > If your target is latest RHEL5, there are 2 problems. > > - RHEL5 virt-install doesn't have the --boot option. This is used to install > xen PV guests. We could work around this by enabling install_location support > for PV, which xen + virt-install have supported in RHEL5 forever. But not sure > how that meshes with existing deployments getting a cobbler upgrade. > > Hmm, who is using Xen PV out there? Speak up if you are. I'm willing to shoot it. > - RHEL5 virt-install doesn't had --disk driver_type= for qemu_driver_type > cobbler option. Not as big of a deal, users just can't specify that value on > RHEL5. > > I don't think Cobbler users ever specified anything other than the default. > > But in that vein, currently all koan image/qemu/xen guest creation is broken > on any RHEL5 since October, due to unconditional use of guest.set_autostart > API which isn't in RHEL5. > > That's interesting as it does seem to confirm that nobody is using it. Which seems to align with my thoughts that: (A) people don't upgrade too often (B) the field is still largely VMware :) So, yeah. > > > As for image create, totally, it was added at the request of the oVirt team > > in > > ancient days -- there's no need for it anymore. Please test it live and get > > back to me? I don't think it's fair to throw it over the wall and ask the > > community folks to test/fix it and this shouldn't > > be too hard to do. When you get done, we can ask a few others to try it out > > and exercise the corners further. > > > > > I'll test on f16 xen + kvm. But TBH I'm not that motivated to blow away a > machine to install RHEL5 and test the variety of combinations there (and I > can't use a VM since this needs testing for fullvirt) > > I'd be happy to see if you could install successfully to a LVM partition with "--virt-disk" or whatever set, and you could create a machine with two NICs. That would probably be good enough. > > I could reformat the patch to preserve the old code and only use the new code > if koan can't import virtinst. However from a long term maintenance point of > view, that would be making the already bad koan situation (more or less same > virtinst implementation copied across 2.5 files with varying assortment of > fixes) even worse, since it would add yet another same-but-not-quite > implementation of libvirt guest creation that could miss fixes, etc. But > certainly it would greatly minimize risk for old hosts (but then again if old > hosts really wanted to minimize risk would they be updating? :) /me trolls ) > > I don't really care so much about keeping the old code around. I'm mostly in Linus mode these days. > > So if that works for you I'd be happy to adjust the patch. > > > > > Further discussion probably belongs on cobbler-devel, and when we get done > > you > > can send me a github pull request to github.com/cobbler > > (http://github.com/cobbler) > > > > > Whoops, I was doing patches against fedorahosted cobbler.git. Someone should > push a commit there marking that repo as dead... > > Yes, we should. Noted… if I still have access, I'll do it, if not, will ask Scott or James. > > And sorry about cobbler vs. cobbler-devel, I'll subscribe. No problem, thanks! > > Thanks, > Cole > >
_______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list cobbler@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
