On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:48:43AM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Fri, 2019-03-15 at 10:26 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:23:52AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 12:31:08PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > > env: > > > > - IMAGE="centos-7" > > > > - - DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS="--with-init-script=upstart" > > > > + - DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS="--with-init-script=redhat" > > > > > > Heh, this was always kind of wrong since RHEL 6 was the one > > > with upstart > > True, but the argument IIRC was that we would get coverage for that > code path regardless of what distribution we'd run it on... It's not > like we actually test whether init can bring up libvirtd and friends > in our 'make check' anyway :) > > > Actually on second thoughts, this is not desirable. > > > > We should be actually purging the traditional init script too. RHEL-7 > > is systemd based and so are all Fedora's. The "redhat" initscript > > was last used in RHEL-6. Even if other distros use classis sysvinit > > I don't think they'll use the Red Hat variant initscript. > > Yeah, I was thinking about that yesterday too... > > Honestly I just didn't spend time checking whether the "redhat" init > scripts actually have anything RHEL-specific or they would work on > other SysV-init based distribution, so I decided to go only for the > obvious low-hanging fruit at first. IME the only thing common about sysvinit scripts is that they're all written in shell and all buggy. I would just kill it as the name we gave it always indicated it was only for redhat distro variants. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
