On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 11:14 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 08:26:18PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 05:17:01PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Today in Absurd Dependency Bingo: > > > > glusterfs x86_64 3.4.0-2.fc19 > > > > @updates-testing 4.7 M > > [...] > > > > qemu-common x86_64 2:1.4.2-4.fc19 > > > > @updates-testing 624 k > > > > $ rpm -q --changelog qemu-common > > [...] > > * Wed May 15 2013 Cole Robinson <crobi...@redhat.com> - 2:1.4.1-2 > > - Enable gluster support > > > > And then all the rest just falls out from there because they require qemu. > > > > > > > > vinagre x86_64 3.8.2-1.fc19 @side > > > > 3.0 M > > > > (This one requires spice.) > > > > At 4.7M glusterfs isn't exactly tiny, and is another one of these things > > that's not so useful unless configured (even though that's awesomely easy); > > maybe the libs could be split out? > > The problem is that qemu's block layer isn't a stable API with > pluggable / loadable modules. There's been some talk and even patches > upstream trying making it so (at least, the loadable modules part, the > stable API part will probably never happen). But it's not done yet. > > qemu's internal block API: > http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob;f=include/block/block_int.h;h=c6ac871e210ea21f91d799e44a102119048dde54;hb=HEAD#l83 > > Therefore if you want to use qemu to access, in this case, a glusterfs > cluster, then you have to compile qemu with gluster support, and that > pulls in glusterfs. We could compile it out, but then no one would be > able to use gluster to store their virtual machines at all. > > Not sure if glusterfs could be split into client and server parts > and/or if that would help (only a "client" bit is needed). > > There's not a good way around this except a bunch of work in qemu > upstream.
Well. Will qemu still actually _run_ without glusterfs being present? If so, do we actually need to express a dependency on glusterfs? To me, the semantics of 'X requires Y' are fairly close to 'X will not function correctly without Y'. 'X can do some extra stuff if Y is present' does not seem to meet the case. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
