qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH 0/2] Fixed QEMU 1.0.1 support


From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH 0/2] Fixed QEMU 1.0.1 support
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:46:56 -0500
User-agent: Notmuch/0.13.2+93~ged93d79 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)

Michal Privoznik <address@hidden> writes:

> On 25.09.2012 19:08, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Daniel P. Berrange
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:57:23AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>> On 09/25/2012 06:54 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 02:49:00PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>>>>> On 25.09.2012 10:58, Dmitry Fleytman wrote:
>>>>>>> This patch fixes incorrect help screen parsing for QEMU 1.0.1 package
>>>>>>> Version line changed from
>>>>>>>     QEMU emulator version 1.0 (qemu-kvm-1.0), Copyright (c) 2003-2008 
>>>>>>> Fabrice Bellard
>>>>>>> To
>>>>>>>     QEMU emulator version 1.0,1 (qemu-kvm-1.0.1), Copyright (c) 
>>>>>>> 2003-2008 Fabrice Bellard
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This seems like a bug to me. If it is a micro version number, why is it
>>>>>> delimited with comma instead of dot? If it is not a micro version
>>>>>> number, can we threat it like it is?
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, it smells very much like a QEMU/distro bug to me.
>>>>
>>>> It is an upstream bug:
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-02/msg02527.html
>>>>
>>>> Distros should probably be backporting that particular patch, but
>>>> there's still the question of whether we should deal with it in libvirt
>>>> because it is upstream.
>>>
>>> Well it is a bug on only one branch of upstream, that was promptly
>>> fixed, so I still don't think we should complicate libvirt by dealing
>>> with it. It is trivial for QEMU maintainers to fix
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> --
>> 
>> FWIW, the raw tarball from qemu.org still contains the bug. They
>> didn't reissue the tarball. First commit on the list here:
>> http://wiki.qemu.org/ChangeLog/1.0
>> 
>
> [CC'ing QEMU devel list]
>
> Maybe QEMU guys can reissue the tarball since Fedora (and probably other
> distros as well) is using this tarball when building a package?
> Or is it distro's business to backport the patch?

We released a qemu-1.0.1-1.tar.bz2 that contained the fixed VERSION
file.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Michal



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]