poelstra at redhat.com
Thu Jan 14 20:34:29 UTC 2010
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
>>> 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.
> 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."
More information about the advisory-board