[pve-devel] [PATCH qemu v2 0/5] Provides a qemu-system-x86 virtual package
t.lamprecht at proxmox.com
Mon Oct 16 10:00:27 CEST 2017
On 10/11/2017 11:06 AM, Emmanuel Kasper wrote:
> This will allow the installation of extra packages requiring a qemu binary
> Bigger use case is libguestfs0 and libguestfs-tools , this has been asked
> in a few different forum threads
> libguestfs-tools allow to inspect and edit disk images of offline guests
> and do not require libvirt domains to be used.
> Patches 1-3 is just for refactoring / modernizing the qemu packaging
> Patch 4 has the real change
> Patch 5 is an optional bug fix
> We do not take special care for aarch64, as Thomas said this would
> probably happen in a package with a different name, which could then
> have its own <package_name>.links file
> Changes since V1:
> * move symlinks to new file pve-qemu-kvm.links
> Changes since RFC:
> * do not rename the qemu binary, but add a kvm symlink to it
> * do not rename the qemu man page, but add kvm symlint to it
> * add a symlink from qemu-system-i386 to qemu-system-x86_64 to better
> match the Debian package we 'Provides'.
> Emmanuel Kasper (5):
> Remove deprecated dh_clean -k
> Install userspace utilities and UEFI roms via dh_install
> Bump dephelper compatibility level to 10
> Provides a qemu-system-x86 virtual package
> Add a 'Conflicts' with qemu-system-common from Debian
> debian/compat | 2 +-
> debian/control | 8 ++++++--
> debian/pve-qemu-kvm.install | 9 +++++++++
> debian/pve-qemu-kvm.links | 4 ++++
> debian/rules | 20 ++++----------------
> 5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 debian/pve-qemu-kvm.install
> create mode 100644 debian/pve-qemu-kvm.links
In general, looks good to me.
Upstream package provides also the following man pages:
Which we do not (we have only qemu), would it make sense
to make a link to these?
Additionally to this, would it be possible to remove the postinst?
AFAIS, the single use for it was to allow the transition from
keeping the ifup/down scripts in /etc/kvm and not /etc/qemu and
that happened in PVE 2.2 (2012), so it should be safe to remove it
for 5.1 as no direct upgrade from 2.2 to 5.1 is possible/
But that isn't really urgent and can be done later.
More information about the pve-devel