I think the main point is that we're only too happy to put stuff into
Xen to make it easier to build rpm/deb's etc. I'd like to have this
stuff checked into our tree to minimize the downstream diffs -- if it's
in the tree then we're more likely to remember to bare the requirements
in mind with future changes. It also gives us (as in xen-devel) the
opportunity to see how Xen is being packaged and provide
comments/feedback, and perhaps encourage some kind of uniformity across
the different vendor packages.
However, we still need to make sure that all the build options that are
convenient for developers are still available, ideally as the default.
Ian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Heath [mailto:doogie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 07 February 2005 18:50
> To: Brian Wolfe
> Cc: Ian Pratt; Xen Devel Mailing List;
> Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] debian python-install.patch (3 of 5)
>
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Brian Wolfe wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 18:00 +0000, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > > > > > --home causes python's distutils to install into
> > > > > > /usr/lib/python/, while
> > > > > > --root causes it to install into
> > > > > > /usr/lib/python$ver/site-packages, which
> > > > > > is the more correct location.
> > > > Er, in all packages I have ever used, make dist has given me
> > > > a tree(which is
> > > > normally placed into a tar by upstream, and 'dist'ributed,
> > > > hence the name),
> > > > that can then be optionally overlayed ontop an already
> > > > installed system.
> > >
> > > Yes, but its quite usual for bpeople to install Xen on a different
> > > system to which is was built (e.g. our binary install tar file).
> > > Installing into /usr/lib/python/ means that it'll be
> found on the module
> > > search path, whereas /usr/lib/python$ver/site-packages
> will only work if
> > > the version is the same.
> >
> > Mind please that I have no empirical proof, just personal
> experience and
> > opinions/preferences expressed to me by admins I know.
> >
> > I would have to disagree here. If Xen is to be taken seriously in a
> > commercial environment, then it's going to have to be available as a
> > dist binary from either redhat, suse, debina, or another
> top level linux
> > distro IMHO.
> >
> > Having to compile things for every machine tends to turn
> potential users
> > off that aren't programmers or gentoo/*bsd afficianados from my
> > experience.
> >
> > Heck, this is why I stated packaging 1.3 in the first place. I just
> > couldn't deal with deploying by hand every couple of days. I really
> > needed it to be automatic as possible.
>
> You don't actually come out for or against any variation. :|
>
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Home