On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 10:41:57AM +0100, Luca Capello wrote: > Hi there! > > On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:17:16 +0100, Luca Capello wrote: > > On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:37:47 +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 03:54:02PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote: > >> [..snip..] > >>> So, I see two solutions, beside the fact that libvirt-bin should depend > >>> on netcat-openbsd: > >> > >> virt-manager invokes netcat on the remote side for console access. > > > > Mmm, while I see your point, the only way to assure netcat-openbsd is > > installed on the remote side is a dependency in libvirt-bin, given that > > virt-manager is not required on the remote side. > > > >>> 1) libvirt-bin calls /bin/nc.openbsd, not elegant, but it avoids any > >>> problem in an automatic way > >> > >> This would break non Debian systems. We could check for nc.openbsd first > >> and then fall back to nc though (which would mean fixing up > >> Autodetect-if-the-remote-nc-command-supports-the-q-o.patch) but in that > >> case it's probably easier to drop the dependency altogether (which is > >> what upstream plans to do). > > > > I am not sure I have completely understood what you wrote: > > > > 1) Autodetect-if-the-remote-nc-command-supports-the-q-o.patch was > > introduced because of #573172. In Debian Both netcat-traditional and > > netcat-openbsd have the -q option, but none of the upstream netcat > > has it [1][2]. > > Actually, I found another bug which is even more interesting: #564034. > There, the netcat-openbsd maintainer (cc:ed) announced that he had > restored the original behavior if -q is not given: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > netcat-openbsd (1.89-4) unstable; urgency=low > > * Quit immediately after EOF if -q is not given (i.e. make the default > equivalent to -q 0). This is the standard upstream behavior and what > other Linux distributions use. It is different from netcat-traditional, > but compatibility with other versions of OpenBSD netcat is more > important. (Closes: #502188) > > -- Decklin Foster <[email protected]> Sun, 18 Apr 2010 20:05:08 -0400 > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > So, am I right that we do not need anymore the -q patch if libvirt-bin > and virt-manager depends on netcat-openbsd >= 1.89-4?
No, we still need to support this for interoperability with other Linux distributions. There are lots of people using virt-manager on Debian to manage remote RedHat, SuSE, whatnot. Cheers, -- Guido -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
