Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16

2011-03-18 Thread Jim Fehlig
Eric Blake wrote: > On 03/18/2011 11:36 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > >> Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> >>> The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds >>> yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 >>> >>> Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 >>> in fact sufficient ? If

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16

2011-03-18 Thread Eric Blake
On 03/18/2011 11:36 AM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds >> yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 >> >> Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 >> in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/ >> >

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16

2011-03-18 Thread Jim Fehlig
Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds > yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 > > Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 > in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/ > Xen 4.0.x contains some "tech preview" libxenlight

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16

2011-03-18 Thread Eric Blake
On 03/18/2011 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds > yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 > > Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 > in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/ > > * libvirt.spec.in: Disable

[libvirt] [PATCH] Disable libxl build in RPM on Fedora < 16

2011-03-18 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
The xen RPM in Fedora isn't new enough to support libxl builds yet. Disable it until Fedora 16 Q: What actually is the min required Xen ? Is xen 4.0.1 in fact sufficient ? If so I'll change this to s/16/15/ * libvirt.spec.in: Disable libxl on Fedora < 16 --- libvirt.spec.in |5 + 1 files