This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-users] Upgrade Proceedure

To: "Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Upgrade Proceedure
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 15:21:33 +0100
Cc: Mike Wright <xktnniuymlla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Tobin <itobin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 15 May 2007 07:20:17 -0700
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=qt9cK7LqfUDkcPEZ+nOxwFur7uLQaeAgg1E+3A2TWN36QIWj8uM579iE6Dv7IXMcHs8J/oP3TD48WTyD29kTE1lp4gYnyXgCG+FajYiR5ZDP6awqsgtxruBTxiJdvrn8OXLtFCquCF/Ms74bzpdk+BdemLNsiNQg6zzLdtymLu4=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jWr2ZvevXeAOT3N3snaiC58kWTgyE+CfjbMmoiq/n2PnmLxstR0DUstKBxv7EJAs4q6s4RwBXQmf3I7YWFOc4Us0gbR52cDY5f7cHS7Lz+Lw8gcAEHwe3sNPaK04KB0PQUbsIj16BhRF5zp6Kz0GAWI6A4GLA7i0lYLXq7gozmA=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B018E1D14@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B018E1D14@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20070221)
Petersson, Mats wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nkadel@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 15 May 2007 14:31
To: Petersson, Mats
Cc: Ian Tobin; Mike Wright; xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Upgrade Proceedure

Petersson, Mats wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nico Kadel-Garcia
Sent: 15 May 2007 10:13
To: Ian Tobin
Cc: Mike Wright; xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Upgrade Proceedure

Ian Tobin wrote:
Hi Ian, Mats,

Thought I'd chime in here because I got bitten using the
make uninstall

Within the Makefile uninstall section is this line:

     rm -rf $(D)/boot/*xen*

This will remove every file in your boot directory that
contains the
string "xen", so things like vixen or roxen will also
match. More
relevant though is that it will also remove previous
versions of xen.
If you are no longer interested in them, or don't care that
you may have
to rebuild them this is not a problem. If it matters that
you retain
prior kernels you may want to comment out that line in the
Makefile.  In
the current unstable that's somewhere around line #186.

Just a heads up ;)

Mike Wright :m)
This is *precisely* why I like RPM's and apt-based package managers: a lot of installers and uninstallers are pretty darned bad. Have you submitted a bug for this?
Actually, the bug is that there's no uninstall script,
rather than that
the "make uninstall" removes the wrong stuff... The uninstall script
should be generated by the install script to "remove
exactly the files
installed and nothing else". This is the REAL bug. Then we could use
this install script to do "make uninstall" too.
And the uninstall script should not be part of the Makefile used to install the software precisely..... why?

Because you may want to install/uninstall on a machine that doesn't
(need to) have the source-code (or corresponding Makefile).
That's what package management tools are for. If values are being set in the Makefile (such as the root directory!), then the uninstaller has to built by the Makefile and itself installed (conceivable!) and summoned as part of the uninstall procedure.
Of course, anyone who wishes to un-install can download the source-code,
but it's a completley unneccessary step to instal the source code on 15
machines just because you wanted to REMOVE the resulting files from that
source code, don't you think?
The INSTALL script you mention works without the build directory in place? That's a bit.... odd.

If you're not familiar with it, I'd like to point out that there is a
INSTALL script in the distribution directory which can be used to
install the resulting product of the make (which is what I described
earlier in this thread).
I use Makefiles and RPM's to support full-blown package management, version management, conflict reports, etc., etc., etc. Writing all of that into an installer or uniinstaller script is quite a lot of work.

I recognize that not every OS has this kind of package management, and prefer to build on the fly.

Xen-users mailing list