[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Libguestfs] Plans for libguestfs



On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:28:19PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 09:01:02PM +0200, Hilko Bengen wrote:
> > * Richard W.M. Jones:
> > 
> > > I'm interested to know what the security/maintenance objections are.
> > > We ship the *supermin* appliance in Fedora, precisely because it
> > > improves security and maintenance.
> > 
> > Ah well, it seems that I misunderstood what base.img is for. For some
> > reason I believed that executables and libraries are extracted from the
> > downloaded binary packages and copied into the image.
> > 
> > What was I thinking? Sorry for the noise. :-)
> > 
> > With the question about security out of the way (for which I'm glad), I
> > still think that it would be best to build supermin.d/base.img and
> > supermin.d/hostfiles at installation time -- and to provide a documented
> > way for the user to rebuild them.
> 
> Hmmm maybe rerunning febootstrap?  They will need a network connection
> and it may be error prone, but it could work.
> 
> > > I guess we only have one version of Python at a time in Fedora.
> > >
> > > Could we do something like adding a ./configure --disable-library
> > > option, allowing you to disable everything (except Python) and thus
> > > just rebuild Python bindings?
> > 
> > Is it even possible to build the Python bindings without the libguestfs
> > library being available through libtool?
> 
> Yes, you may be right about that.
> 
> OTOH if you disable the appliance and the daemon and all the language
> bindings except Python, libguestfs builds are a bit quicker:
> 
> time sh -c './configure --disable-appliance --disable-daemon --disable-ocaml --disable-perl --disable-fuse --disable-ruby --disable-haskell --disable-php --with-java-home=no && make clean && make'
> 4m33s
> 
> That's still building the tools though, so we should have a
> --disable-tools option.
> 
> > Speaking of Python bindings... is it possible to convince libtool to
> > build just a .so file, without .0.0 extension and symlinks? (As I
> > reported a bug in dh_python2, it was pointed out to me that this was
> > wrong.)
> 
> No idea ..  We copied the code for building the Python bindings from
> libvirt, so we probably inherited any bugs it has too.

IIRC, you can add '-avoid-version' to the LDFLAGS for the library
in question

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]