[Mageia-dev] qemu new upstream release (1.0-rc1) and should we move from qemu-kvm to qemu?

Sun Nov 13 10:58:15 CET 2011

Le samedi 12 novembre 2011 à 21:11 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
+> On 12.11.2011 20:20, Michael Scherer wrote:
+> > Le samedi 12 novembre 2011 à 16:44 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
+> >
+> >> There is also one important patch missed in Mageia -
+> >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg00787.html it's
+> >> dependency for the GNS3 simulator. OpenSUSE already includes it
+> >> https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=qemu&project=openSUSE%3ATools
+> >>
+> >> If nobody is against I will do it and contact the maintainer (misc).
+> > I prefer to wait on the stable release ( ie, no rc1 ).
+> > We will wait on stable version of qemu.
+> OK
+> > And no patch unless it comes from upstream ( and even, I am not keen on
+> > backporting feature, better wait for stable release ).
+> >
+> GNS3 is already in stable! This package is broken - no dynamips (=no 
+> router emulation at all...), no patched qemu (no virtualization support 
+> at all...) According to the developers and their online documentation 
+> for package maintainers http://forum.gns3.net/post11571.html UDP patched 
+> Qemu is dependency/very important.
+
+The fact that someone pushed a broken package is not a good reason to
+add patches to qemu.  We have too many patches on a general scale, and I
+do not want to end with a 2nd package like gdb. 
+
+Patches make harder to upgrade, harder to make sure security is done
+correctly, and harder to ensure stuff are working ( since we are on our
+own when we patch something ).
+
+So for the patches, make sure it is upstream  ( and given the discussion
+on ml, it should be soon ) and then in a tarball ( again, given that's a
+rc 1, that should be ok soon ).
+
+> We must fix the package and provide at least not so heavy broken ones...
+> 
+> I've prepared new version of GNS3, included into svn dynamips and 
+> xdotool (this one suggested) - these I can maintain with my mentor, so I 
+> ask for patch qemu in stable versus UDP support.
+
+Updates are not supposed to get new features, so that's no. And again,
+maybe people could do more tests before pushing broken rpm to stable
+( like gsn3 ). 
+-- 
+Michael Scherer
+
+