On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/13/2014 12:04 PM, George Dunlap wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 03/12/2014 12:38 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >>>> <snip> >>>>> I get a forbidden on that SRPM ... do you have a copy somewhere? >>>>> >>>> Yep, here goes: http://pasik.reaktio.net/fedora/xen/xen-4.4.0-0.rc4.1.fc20.src.rpm >>>> >>>> -- Pasi >>> OK, lets start making some decisions on what we want to try to use from >>> a dependency perspective. >>> >>> What version of libvirt do we need with this? >> [CC'ing Dario Faggioli and Jim Fehlig, who have been working on >> libvirt on libxl] >> >> libxl is designed to be backwards compatible, so there are a number of >> potential libvirt versions that should all work. >> >> What kinds of constraints are there from the CentOS side? i.e., why >> not just use the most recent release? > > The only issue with that is then we have to keep moving up to the latest > version all the time ... not very "enterprisey". If we can pick a > version with long term maintenance, we should be able to keep it stable > more easily. Maybe the EL7 version of libvirt with patches as necessary? So, you asked "what version of libvirt do we need", but you still haven't actually given me any reasonable constraints; without that, I can't really answer the question. :-) Are there any versions of libvirt designated "maintenance" releases by the community? Or is a release going to need to be "maintained" by whomever wants to keep them going (as RH will do with whatever version is in EL7)? -George _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
