-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
libvirt: 5.4.0 -> 6.1.0 #81161
libvirt: 5.4.0 -> 6.1.0 #81161
Conversation
Hopefully it can make it into 20.03 to avoid qemu co-existing with old libvirt (potential issues), but I guess there is just not enough time to extensively test this update. |
@wedens fixed this bug? - #66584 (comment) |
@Izorkin Unfortunately, no idea. I don't use (and can't easily setup) bridge networking to test it. If you (or someone else who uses bridge) can test, that'd be neat. Works fine with NAT networking fwiw. |
@wedens error build pythonPackages.libvirt
|
If rebuild systev used python2Packages.libvirt, need change to python3Packages.libvirt |
please freeze the 5.4.0 version for python 2
|
With 5.9.0 correct builded |
Yeah, python2 support was dropped in 6.0.0. I'll try to figure out how to use different versions for python2/3. Hopefully it won't make it confusing. |
a59199d
to
f97c95e
Compare
Alright, I've added 5.9.0 for python2. Not sure if it's the correct thing to do though (how possible that there will be some incompatibilities between different libvirt and libvirt-python versions?). @jonringer maybe I misunderstood and you suggest pinning both libvirt and libvirt-python to the latest version that supports python2? |
@wedens error rebuild |
@GrahamcOfBorg build nixops |
f97c95e
to
d11295c
Compare
@wedens error build. Used libvirt 6.0.0, needed 5.9.0
|
I'm not sure what to do about it, tbh. I'd rather not use a band aid like updating to 5.9.0 instead of 6.0.0 and put off the python2 problem for later. |
If it was just the python-module, i would be fine with deprecating. But I'm not okay with breaking nixops packages |
What are chances that nixops will update to python 3 in the nearby future? I guess it'll be a reasonable compromise to update to 5.9.0 for now and to 6.* closer to 20.09 release. If there is a high chance that nixops will move to python 3 somewhere before 20.09. Anyway, I'll wait for more opinions on the subject. |
Since the python2 was not the goal of this PR, you could also just do a freeze at 5.4.0, instead of bumping to 5.9.0 |
@jonringer Are you suggesting having two libvirt/libvirt-python versions (5.4.0 and 6.0.0) in nixpkgs? I'm not sure how this compatibility works, but as far as I understand, if libvirt daemon (presumably used via libvirt nixos module) is 6.0.0, nixops (that'll use libvirt-python with libvirt 5.4.0), won't be able to manage this libvirt daemon (which is 6.0.0). |
I suggesting that, instead of freezing the python2 version at 5.9.0, you keep it at 5.4.0. python3 will be at latest |
d11295c
to
d239632
Compare
Ok. I've added |
Any details? |
Yes, this error. |
@volth new version libvirt used systemd socket activation - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750340 |
With libvirt 5.9.0 and 6.1.0 correct work. |
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: |
Thank you for the effort to bring recent libvirt into 20.03! I've briefly tested this branch and things seem to work fine - installing QEMU/KVM virtual machine and using it with the default NATted network as well as NixOS-manged bridge. |
Personally, i would like to see the merge commits be removed, should be able to clean up with otherwise LGTM
|
Done. |
@volth Is it some known issue with libvirt itself? |
Really upgrade 5.4 to 5.9 and 6.1?
|
Alright, let's do it while we're at it. @Izorkin I've applied your patch |
How can we move this PR forward? |
What's remaining here? Would be very nice to have working libvirt in 20.03! |
I'll work on this first thing on monday |
@globin Perfect, I'd like to see this in 20.03 so we can have this working. Thanks. |
Co-Authored-By: conferno <conferno@camfex.cz>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Python bit looks good. I haven't checked the rest.
Motivation for this change
Closes #81102
Things done
I'm unable to test on Darwin, but I tested with
buildFromTarball
set to true and false.sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
./result/bin/
)nix path-info -S
before and after)/cc @fpletz @globin