On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 11:44:37 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Wed, 2018-06-06 at 09:45 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 08:24:59AM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 18:03 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > We can't use docker on centos6 either and believe it or not the host > > > > doesn't have hardware virt either. > > > > > > > > I could possibly setup libvirt lxc to run the jobs though. > > > > > > I believe running build jobs on libvirt.org in a CentOS 7 container > > > was one of the approaches I mentioned when we initially discussed > > > dropping CentOS 6 support, so if you could make that happen it > > > would certainly be okay with me :) > > > > A more radical option would be to move libvirt.org off onto openshift, > > but that comes with the complexity that I'd need to transparently > > proxy back to real libvirt.org to make /git and /sources URLs continue > > to work > > As long as we need to keep the current box running any part of > libvirt.org, that looks like it would only increase complexity. > > The lxc route sounds like a decent stop-gap measure until either > the current box is upgraded or everything is moved off to a new > box running CentOS 7, whenever that might be. Well, so we need to be able to run configure so that we can create makefiles which build the docs. If we extract the steps to build the docs from makefile into a standalone script called by the makefile we still can build the web without the need to configure everything. Doing containers and stuff seems to be quite a waste just to process some html files.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
