FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-14-2010, 07:08 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 01:05:16PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:46:54PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 January 2010 10:30:45 am Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> > This is not a board issue. If we can not build it in fedora then we can not
> > ship it period. you are free to host it on your fedorapeople space and
> > document how to get it. Best thing to do would be for the upstream project to
> > host the iso and make it available for download.
> >
> > virtio-win drivers are not something that fedora can realistically support.
> > we cannot build them we cannot issue fixes. we have no way to realistically do
> > anything with them.
>
> Fedora the distribution can't build these. I agree.
>
> Fedora the Project can, as members have shown. In this case the open
> source software requires non-Fedora software to build.
>
> We do distribute content that isn't built in koji. It's all at
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/. We can't recreate the ogg
> videos hosted there either. How is this different?

I believe it's not. The only fundamental disconnect is the inability
for us to do the 100% self-built, self-hosted part with the virtio-win
code.

Your point about alt.fp.o is a good one!

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 07:12 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On 01/14/2010 02:05 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:46:54PM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> On Thursday 14 January 2010 10:30:45 am Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>> This is not a board issue. If we can not build it in fedora then we can not
>> ship it period. you are free to host it on your fedorapeople space and
>> document how to get it. Best thing to do would be for the upstream project to
>> host the iso and make it available for download.
>>
>> virtio-win drivers are not something that fedora can realistically support.
>> we cannot build them we cannot issue fixes. we have no way to realistically do
>> anything with them.
>
> Fedora the distribution can't build these. I agree.
>
> Fedora the Project can, as members have shown. In this case the open
> source software requires non-Fedora software to build.
>
> We do distribute content that isn't built in koji. It's all at
> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/. We can't recreate the ogg
> videos hosted there either. How is this different?

I would argue that the virtio-win drivers are not content, but code.

~spot
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 07:34 PM
John Poelstra
 
Default virtio-win drivers

Dennis Gilmore said the following on 01/14/2010 11:25 AM Pacific Time:
> On Thursday 14 January 2010 01:05:20 pm John Poelstra wrote:
>> Dennis Gilmore said the following on 01/14/2010 10:46 AM Pacific Time:
>>> On Thursday 14 January 2010 10:30:45 am Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>>>> The Windows drivers required to install using kvm virtio have not been
>>>> included in previous Fedora releases. This is a serious omission, in
>>>> that virtio makes a noticeable performance difference for the guest.
>>>> While it is understood that packaging up an ISO of binary drivers for
>>>> Windows which koji cannot build is not acceptable for the fedora
>>>> repositories, we have a problem in that we need drivers which are known
>>>> to work with a given Fedora release. A possible solution is to have
>>>> virt-install or virt-manager download the ISO if it is not already
>>>> present on the host. The ISO is only around 4MB, so this shouldn't be
>>>> too big of an issue.
>>>>
>>>> In order to make this work, and know that we are getting drivers that
>>>> should work with Fedora, we really need a place to host the "officially
>>>> supported" virtio-win drivers for Fedora. The drivers themselves are
>>>> open source, GPL license applies. The only blocker from the real
>>>> repositories is the fact that koji cannot build them. We are asking the
>>>> board for approval and possibly a hosting location for these drivers so
>>>> that they can be supported in the Fedora space. Would this be a
>>>> possibility?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Justin
>>>
>>> This is not a board issue. If we can not build it in fedora then we can
>>> not ship it period. you are free to host it on your fedorapeople space
>>> and document how to get it. Best thing to do would be for the upstream
>>> project to host the iso and make it available for download.
>>
>> Where do we explicitly tell people this this is our policy (setting
>> aside how "obvious" it might be to some). If someone is asking for an
>> exception to our stated policies as a project it is an issue that the
>> board or FESCo needs to address and we owe a clear response to.
>>
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-
> built_binaries_or_libraries
>
> so it doesn't say it has to be built in koji but we explicitly state that you
> cant use pre built binaries except for bootstrapping. with an exception for
> firmware. I don't think we can class windows drivers as firmware.
>

Is there any harm in being more explicit.

>
> Again its not a board issue it would be an issue for FESCo and the packaging
> committee to resolve.
>

Please re-read my prior posts. I am not claiming it as a "board issue."

Thanks,
John
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 08:05 PM
Adam Jackson
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On Thu, 2010-01-14 at 13:26 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > Is it one of our existing written policies that we only provide content
> > built by Koji? I'm curious if anyone knows if/where we state that.
>
> I'm very very very uncomfortable with permitting content into Fedora
> that isn't built via Koji.
>
> Why can't koji build these drivers? Do they depend on Windows bits to
> build? If so, they're almost certainly not license acceptable for Fedora.

I can't find a mailing list thread to back me up on this, but I believe
the problem was one or more of:

- mingw toolchain not building
- mingw toolchain not working well enough to produce Windows binaries
- insufficient Windows DDK in Fedora packaging

Either of those would preclude using koji to build the Windows virtio
drivers.

If you use Windows to produce the binaries, then there may or may not be
a philosophical problem in hosting them on Fedora infrastructure. I
could see arguments for drawing lines of acceptability around any
combination of {gcc, msvc} for the compiler and {wine, MS DDK} for the
headers (although some combinations would be more logically consistent
than others).

It's a line worth drawing. There are other cases where Fedora could
legitimately want to host code that runs on other OSes. The LiveUSB
creator is probably the most obvious example.

From a FESCO perspective, the question is about the trustworthiness of
the resulting binaries given various build paths. A Windows image with
nothing else installed but the requisite build tools will produce a
binary with some trust level. If we say we trust (linux, gcc, wine) to
build virtio-win, but that we don't trust (win7, gcc, wine) to build
virtio-win, then we're implicitly saying there's some attack vector in
win7 that we're not willing to risk. I have trouble coming up with a
plausible scenario for this, particularly given virtualization with no
network for isolation and guestfish to slurp out the build results. I
hate Windows and all, but the binaries the build produces are verifiable
objects, even from a Linux machine.

I'm entirely willing to accept that Fedora Infrastructure would be
unwilling to _manage_ other operating systems. That's well within their
rights. I'm less willing to believe that the mere hosting of code built
on other platforms is unmanageable, or intrinsically contrary to the
goals of the project. Not that it's trivially acceptable; but I don't
think it's inherently unacceptable either.

- ajax
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 08:27 PM
Matt Domsch
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 03:12:00PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> I would argue that the virtio-win drivers are not content, but code.

code, for which we have the source code under an acceptable license
(GPL). The catch is, we can't build it in a Fedora distribution
environment, nor can we execute it in such, _and_ it requires
proprietary tools to build. As such, keeping out of the distribution
proper is appropriate, though I can see the parallels to firmware too.

Per Justin, there is an effort to get these drivers to build with
MinGW. At that time, they can be built in koji and packaged in the
repositories, just as we do with the other mingw-* packages. But that
may be a while in coming. Until then...

I'm looking for a way to say "yes" to this, to keep the Fedora Project
umbrella wider than just the strict distribution focus. This request
may be a bit of a stretch, but only a bit.

If guests don't run well on our virt platform, especially when that
guest is very widespread, people will simply run a different virt
platform. _That_ doesn't help us. Making it easier to provide the
best experience when using Fedora is, IMHO, worthwile and beneficial
to Fedora and our user base.

We don't have to say yes to this hosting request. linux-kvm.org could
be used to host these Windows drivers, but we have some precident in
that livecd-creator for Windows is hosted on fedorahosted.org.

I'm not opposed to Fedora hosting these (I suggest alt.fp.o) until
such a time that they can be built into the repositories properly.

Thanks,
Matt

_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 08:38 PM
"Tom "spot" Callaway"
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On 01/14/2010 04:05 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> I'm less willing to believe that the mere hosting of code built
> on other platforms is unmanageable, or intrinsically contrary to the
> goals of the project.

Okay, I may have misread this. If all that is being asked of Fedora is
to provide hosting space for these drivers, I suppose that is fine.

To be clear (from my perspective):

* Including pre-built virtio-win driver in a Fedora package [ NOT OK ]
* Hosting pre-built virtio-win driver in a Fedora Hosted project (along
with source) [ OK ]

~spot
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-14-2010, 08:46 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default virtio-win drivers

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 04:38:12PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> On 01/14/2010 04:05 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > I'm less willing to believe that the mere hosting of code built
> > on other platforms is unmanageable, or intrinsically contrary to the
> > goals of the project.
>
> Okay, I may have misread this. If all that is being asked of Fedora is
> to provide hosting space for these drivers, I suppose that is fine.
>
> To be clear (from my perspective):
>
> * Including pre-built virtio-win driver in a Fedora package [ NOT OK ]
> * Hosting pre-built virtio-win driver in a Fedora Hosted project (along
> with source) [ OK ]

And, I would suspect:

* Hosting pre-built virtio-win driver on alt.fp.o (along with source) [ OK ]
(although Fedora Hosted certainly makes this more elegant)

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org