Re: [Xen-API] [XCP] [kronos] missed nfs-common dependence

[George Shuklin <george.shuklin@xxxxxxxxx>]

OK, sorry, miss that.

But idea to split packages to separate SM's is still actual. If you 
install storage-manager, you expect it will provide same as normal XCP 
(xe sr-create and it works), but this is not completely true: You will 
need to set up some other packages, so using hard dependence for 
something like xcp-storage-manager-nfs and suggest for 
xcp-strorage-manager-nfs in dependence of xcp-storage-manager will be 
better, IMHO.

On 14.01.2012 10:42, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/14/2012 03:54 AM, George Shuklin wrote:
> > Good day.
> >
> > Package xcp-storage-manager has no dependence on nfs-common. Without
> > that package very non-intuitive error appear during type=nfs sr creation:
> >
> > Error code: SR_BACKEND_FAILURE_72
> > Error parameters: , Required NFS server version unsupported
> > [opterr=rpcinfo failed or timed out: return code 2],
> >
> > (and some idea - may be it can be rational to split SM to few packages
> > - main, with refcounter and so on, and individual packages for every
> > type? We don't need samba for systems without SMB, we don't need nfs
> > for systems, who don't use NFS and so on. Making one big package is
> Hi,
>
> There's no absolute needs for NFS. You well may be using Samba
> instead (which I do, I'm used to setting-up Samba share, I'm less
> confident with NFS).
>
> Adding a new Depends: would *force* everyone to install nfs-common,
> which isn't something we want to do (NFS isn't strictly needed).
>
> In the Debian package which I uploaded to SID, xcp-storage-managers
> already has a Recommends: lvm2, nfs-common. I think that's really
> enough. Remember: everything that is in the Recommends section
> will be installed by default, unless you *manually* decide to not install
> recommended software, either by using the --no-install-recommends
> on the apt-get command line, or by adding this as an option in your
> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d with something like that:
>
> APT
>     {
>        Install-Recommends "false";
>     }
>
> So I think everything is fine by default, and that we have nothing
> to change. Please let me know if you don't agree, and explain why
> you think I'm wrong here.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
_______________________________________________
xen-api mailing list
xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api