2014-06-03 2:59 GMT+08:00 Justin Brown <[email protected]>: > Hello, > > I recently came across the LWN article on oVirt 3.4 > (http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/600370/dfa9cdd4f5ee0bb3/) and was > discussing the lack of Fedora 20 support with an oVirt contributor, > bkp. > > It's been 4 months since I last looked at running oVirt. I use Fedora > 20 on all of my infrastructure, so I was quite surprised that there is > still not support for running the engine on F20. Anyways, rather than > just complaining, I figured it would be more helpful to volunteer some > time to fix the issue. > > 1) I've tried looking through the oVirt bug reports to see what's > happening with Fedora 20. So far, I have identified three issues that > prevent 3.4 from working. Fedora includes sos-3, sos doesn't have > support for all ovirt plugins, and only has Wildfly instead of > JBoss-as. The full list of bugs is listed in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1060198. > > 2) I was looking through the various oVirt yum repositories and > noticed that oVirt provides JBoss-AS along with tons of packages for > the el6 platform; however, for both Fedora 19 and 20, oVirt almost > entirely uses built-in packages. This seems like strange behavior > where the project has gone to great lengths to make sure oVirt works > on platforms with outdated or nonexistent packages, but won't override > or use alternates on platforms that contain overly new packages. Could > someone explain why oVirt doesn't package these for Fedora, > particularly jboss-as? > IMO fedora is more like a environment for development purpose, and I guess oVirt didn't catch up with fedora's changes ? (I mean oVirt don't have support for wildfly)
> > 3) I'm not making accusations or trying to cause trouble, but could > someone explain to an outsider what happened with Fedora 20 support? > oVirt is a complicated project to say the least and, after a brief > look at some of the RPMs last night, the packages are just as complex. > Basically, I'm trying to figure out if there were some intractable > problems that prevented oVirt from -- more or less -- shipping tweaked > Fedora 19 dependencies for oVirt on Fedors 20, or whether it was more > a lack of manpower, a lack of interested user base, or perhaps > > I'm just getting started on digesting the packages, but I think it > should be feasible to pull the problematic packages from F19, tweak > them to ovirt-* versions (eg. ovirt-sos), and tweak the oVirt packages > to use the non-system paths for those packages. Publish the whole > thing through COPR, and if oVirt is happy with the results, merge them > into the official packages and repository. > > I know that there will be some apprehension about the project taking > on maintaining these dependency packages, but I'm looking to get 3.4 > working on Fedora 20 as a stopgap until 3.5 is released with support > for native packages. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Justin > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
