This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] add a way to disable xen's udev script.

To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] add a way to disable xen's udev script.
From: Vincent Hanquez <vincent.hanquez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 21:33:57 +0100
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:34:31 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1307562567.4176.57.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4DEFA993.1020803@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1307554945.4176.47.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4DEFCC40.3000103@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1307562567.4176.57.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100821 Icedove/3.1.2
On 06/08/2011 08:49 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
chmod -x and rm would do the same things (provided udev isn't unhappy),
but modifying files of package A from another package B is highly
frowned upon.

Dropping down a file which unilaterally disables critical behaviour in
another package requires isn't really much better, you might as well
just add a Conflicts: and be done with it.

Unfortunately that's not possible since all the libs that we need to depend on (libxenctrl, etc.) in xen-utils-4.1 depends on the package that install the udev rules (xen-utils-common).

There's more than likely a perfect way to splice the packages to make it a package issue only, however I'm not terribly interested in putting more efforts than a *trivial* 1 line change.

http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/2011-April/003362.html the Debian 
package maintainer proposed a scheme by which xm and xl could coexist. Adding 
"xapi" (or whichever other toolstack you are considering) as an option to that 
scheme and having all the sets of hotplug scripts check that their scheme is active seems 
like a reasonable solution to me.

Of course in the longer term we should attempt to converge the hotplug
scripts of the different toolstacks into a single set of (e.g. libxl
based) scripts.

Or realize that those scripts are an abomination in the first place and get rid of them.


Xen-devel mailing list