On 28 Oct 2015, at 13:53, Roman Kagan <rkagan(a)virtuozzo.com>
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:10:19PM +1100, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote:
>>>> To sum up, the packaging and naming policy of the virtio-win rpm and the
>>>> virtio-win iso therein are different and neither is clear. Hardcoding
>>>> the policy in v2v without actually knowing it appears risky at best.
>
> It's due to historical reasons mostly. The best way would be having a set of
separate
> distribution images packaged on per-platform base.
Let me try to get the libguestfs requirements straight:
given a set of Windows drivers, it should be able to identify the ones
appropriate for the particular Windows flavor, in order to
1) tell which devices can be configured
2) offline-"install" the storage driver and thus enable the guest too
boot
3) copy over the matching drivers into the guest and allow it to pick
them up on the first boot
Obviously virtio-win driver packaging and libguestfs must agree on how
to deal with this.
Could you please provide any guidance on how to address this problem?
As Vadim said: "The best way would be having a set of separate distribution images
packaged on per-platform base.”
Otherwise you will have to maintain the knowledge of binary compatibility between Windows
platforms, which is different according to the driver type.
Thanks,
Roman.