Re: F27 Self Contained Change: VirtualBox Guest Integration
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 07-07-17 16:43, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 08:14 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>> <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
>>
>>> We want to make the default installation do the right thing, as far
>>> as
>>> possible, on any system, without any explicit configuration or
>>> admin steps.
>>> In this case it's possible: if a virtualization "channel" is
>>> configured,
>>> we should assume that the user wants the service. This means that
>>> the
>>> "guest additions" rpms should be a) installed by default, b)
>>> enabled
>>> when installed, c) work ootb when running in the right
>>> virtualization
>>> and silently do nothing otherwise.
>>> Essentially, I want to take the same image and boot it in
>>> virtualbox,
>>> kvm, on bare metal, and in a container, and have things just work.
>>
>>
>> Good luck with that. Since the Virtualbox guest additions are *not*
>> RPM enabled from their installation CD images, RPM is likely to
>> interfere with working, more recent installations of VBox drivers
>> from
>> the "Guiest Additions" iso image, unless great caution is employed
>> and
>> unless someone can convince them to be completely consistent in
>> installation tools, or to gracefully allow older and newer verson on
>> the same host.
>
>
> yes, we need install VirtualBox-guest-additions , which means
> VirtualBox will be one Fedora Package and BTW I hope that Fedora use
> RPMFusion package or based on that, I have many work there.
> And there [1] we got vboxservice.service which have
> ConditionVirtualization=|oracle
No worries I do plan to use your package as a starting point and
I will coordinate with you. For now I'm focussed on cleaning up the
kernel module stuff though.
Do you expect this to be complete and upstream in time for F27?
While the upstream work is on-going, are you proposing to add the
drivers to the kernel package via a patch? The Change could read
either way on that.
josh