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

Re: [Xen-API] Why is the vhd-util binary committed to the CloudStack source repo?



I’d much rather we stored timestamps in UTC rather than in local time. Does anyone know what these timestamps are actually for?





From: xen-api-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-api-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike McClurg
Sent: 31 May 2012 09:03
To: cloudstack-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-API] Why is the vhd-util binary committed to the CloudStack source repo?


CC'ing xen-api list.

On May 30, 2012 6:31 PM, "Anthony Xu" <Xuefei.Xu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All XenServer releases include vhd-util, in that version it saves local time as timestamp in VHD file, it is probably okay with XenServer.
> But with CloudStack, CloudStack may move VHD file around to XenServer with different time zone, XenServer may think the VHD file is broken because
> the timestamp in the VHD file is behind its local time.
> We put the vhd-util source in tools/vhd-tools/, which is originally coming from xen 4.1 source code. We removed the check of timestamp to workaround above issue.
> The reason we need vhd-util binary is,
> Vhd-util is supposed to run on XenServer host, which is a 32 bit OS. But most developer machines are 64 bit OS.

This isn't something that needs to be fixed, I suppose, but it might be a good idea to patch vhd-util to either ignore timestamps, as you've done, or to use utc instead. We could then put this version of vhd-util in XenServer, and work on upstreaming it to Xen.

Any thoughts on this from xen-api?


> What's your opinion on how to handle this?
> Thanks,
> Anthony
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike McClurg [mailto:mike.mcclurg@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:22 AM
> > To: cloudstack-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Why is the vhd-util binary committed to the CloudStack source
> > repo?
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was looking in scripts/vm/hypervisor/xenserver/ when I noticed that
> > the vhd-util file is actually a compiled binary. So, my questions are:
> >
> > 1) If this program is necessary, then is there a better way to include
> > it in the source tree? Either as a dependency, or as source directly?
> > 2) Is this really necessary in XenServer 6.0 and onwards? I don't have
> > a previous release handy for testing, but I know that we included
> > vhd-util in XenServer since 6.0.
> > 3) Is there anything special about the particular version of vhd-util
> > you've packaged in the git repo? Or will any recent version do?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mike

Xen-api mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.