Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 7/7] make-flight: Stripy xenstored

[Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 7/7] make-flight: Stripy xenstored"):
> A couple of quick questions/observations.  Does this cope in a sensible
> way if, for whatever reason, the chosen daemon isn't present?

That would depend on what you mean by "sensible".  I think that given
that we now think we support both on all architectures, "sensible"
means "the tests fail if one of the xenstoreds doesn't build".  And

that's what this will do :-).

> How hard would it be to add the 3rd option, stub-cxenstored into this
> mix?  It is just one other key in xencommons to tweak.

We would presumably want to do that for a smaller set of tests, but
yes, that could be done as a future enhancement.

> SUPPORT.md doesn't appear to make any statements about the disposition
> of xenstoreds, but stub-cxenstored is used by at least two major
> downstreams so is obviously has security support in practice, and ought
> to be tested.

Looking at /etc/default/xencommons, I think that testing would be done
by setting XENSTORETYPE=domain.  Do we want to test stub C xentored or
stub ocaml xenstored or both ?  The config seems not to have a way to
specify which.  Do we build only one ?

Ian.