On 7/8/2022 12:00 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
On 7/8/22 17:37, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:53 AM David Marchand <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 11:21 PM Gregory Rose <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > xenserver/openvswitch-xen.spec.in <http://openvswitch-xen.spec.in>
>
> This is a bit of an issue. Does anyone even use xenserver anymore?
> All of the documentation and build instructions are really old and
> I wonder of they work anymore. I have no xenserver build environment
> to test any changes.
Same for me.
Ben, Ilya, do you know if this xenserver packaging still has users?
The last comment about it was in 2017.
fefb757ce408 ("debian, xenserver: Update logrotate config to match RHEL.")
Should we keep on updating it? or can we simply drop support for
xenserver packaging?
I'd be inclined to drop it. I have heard so little about xenserver (or XCP,
which
I think is its successor) over the last few years. It makes me a bit sad, since
that's where Open vSwitch started out (in a few cases I literally had to
disassemble bits of its binaries to understand what was going on), but the
world moves on.
It seems like there is a newer open-source XCP-ng project that is
more or less active. There is also proprietary Citrix Hypervisor,
of course. Both seems to have OVS as a default networking solution
and both seems to use some version of OVS 2.5.3. Here is a repo
for XCP-ng one:
https://github.com/xcp-ng-rpms/openvswitch
They are not using our spec file though. And have some custom
patches on top. Not sure about Citrix Hypervisor, but I found some
more or less recent security hotfixes referencing openvswitch package
like this one:
https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX306423/hotfix-xs82e022-for-citrix-hypervisor-82
So, yes, someone is still using it, but they are using about 5 year
old version at this point and they are not using upstream spec file.
Maybe the removal is a right thing to do. We can re-introduce the
scripts and spec files later if someone from aforementioned
projects will want to maintain them. For now, I agree that xenserver
is not a priority, as all the xenserver users seems to use boxed
versions of openvswitch provided by XCP-ng or Citrix anyway. These
projects can maintain their own variants if needed. The code will
remain on 2.17 branch for a next few years, if some of these projects
will decide to upgrade.
Thoughts?
I think removing the xenserver support is the right thing to do for now,
especially given the information just shared.
I'll go ahead and get that done for V4 of the series and add your
suggested change to continue to support AFXDP ci github workflows.
V3 was just posted to see if I can get the order of patches working a
little better.
Regards,
- Greg
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
