From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH] add xl init scripts Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:12:09 -0700 Message-ID: <4C099659.5040308@goop.org> References: <1275665214.24218.35917.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1275665214.24218.35917.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Campbell Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/04/2010 08:26 AM, Ian Campbell wrote: > Would it be better to create /etc/init.d/{xenstored,xenconsoled} > and /etc/sysconfig/{xenstored,xenconsoled} and have those used > consistently no matter which toolstack was in use? Or maybe a single > xendaemons script+config would do. In either case /etc/init.d/xend could > be run only on systems which want xend, similarly for /etc/init.d/xl (if > such a thing is still necessary after my comments below). > Perhaps. xl doesn't need any setup per-se, except for "xl rename 0 Domain-0" to avoid an ugly (null). > Is a network script really required for xl? I think it would be more in > keeping with how xl works to require that the distro configuration be > setup correctly to create bridges etc e.g. correctly > setup /etc/network/interfaces under Debian > or /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-* under RH derived distros etc. > Yes, yes, yes. Its easy to get Redhat/Fedora to set up a bridge as part of its normal network setup. There's no need for us to duplicate it. > Similarly I think xl should assume that the platform has been correctly > configured with a vif hotplug script with the correct behaviour? It's > not clear to me why tools/hotplug/Linux/xen-backend.rules needs to use a > different scheme for vif devices to all the other backend types. The > script there could be a symlink to one of several variants if necessary, > there's no reason for it to be a config item in xl (or xend for that > matter) > > It seems like we are now replicating some of the worst bits of xend > poking around behind the back of the distro config files in xl. > Agree, unless as Stefano mentions, there's a need for some kind of per-domain network setup (bridges, vlans, firewall rules, etc?). J